DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 09/22/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s “Amendment” filed on 04/03/2025 has been considered.
Claims 1-3 and 10-12 are amended. Claims 1-18 remain pending in this application and an action on the merits follow.
Applicant's response by virtue of amendment to claims has not overcome the Examiner' s rejection under 35 USC § 101.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claims 1 and 10 discloses determining a pool of system digital assets …associated with the user computing device identification”. There is no support for this above mentioned limitation in the specification.
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 1-18 are rejected under 35 USC 101. The claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter because claims 1 and 10 are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Claims 2-9 and 11-18 fail to remedy these deficiencies.
The claims 1 and 10 recite storing system digital assets, initiating a digital asset sale interaction, obtaining real-time information regarding the digital asset sale interaction, determining a pool of system digitals assets, determining an amount of system digital asset of the pool of system digital assets to lock for the digital asset sale interaction, locking the amount of the system digital assets as collateral, providing an amount of assets in the payment asset format, executing a nonreal-time digital asset-based interaction process, and providing an amount of the assets in the payment asset format in real-time.
The Claims 1 and 10 recite storing system digital assets, initiating a sale, determining, locking an amount of system digital assets as collateral to process the sale, providing, executing a nonreal-time digital asset-based interaction process, and providing/distributing an amount of the assets steps as drafted, are processes that under broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of commercial interactions and fundamental economic principles, but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting “A bi-directional digital asset point-of-sale (POS) computing device of a digital asset-based interaction system, a user computing device, a digital asset-based interaction computing entity, and a first/second/third/fourth/fifth memory element that stores operational instructions”, nothing in the claim element precludes the steps from practically being performed by organizing commercial interactions. For example, but for the “A bi-directional digital asset point-of-sale (POS) computing device of a digital asset-based interaction system, a user computing device, a digital asset-based interaction computing entity, and a first/second/third/fourth/fifth memory element that stores operational instructions” in the context of these claims encompasses a person manually stores system digital assets, initiates a digital asset sale interaction/sale, determines a pool of system digital assets, determines an amount of system digital assets of the pool of the system digitals assets to lock for the digital asset sale interaction, locks the amount of the system digital assets, provides an amount of assets in the payment asset format, executes a nonreal-time digital asset-based interaction process, and provides/distributes an amount of the assets. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation by managing commercial interactions and fundamental economic principles 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 claims recite an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because obtaining real time information is recited at a high level of generality (i.e., as a general means of obtaining real time commercial/sale interaction information step) and amounts to mere data gathering and mere data outputting, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claims as a whole merely describe how to generally “apply” the concept of storing, initiating, obtaining, determining, locking, executing, and providing in a computer environment. The claimed computer components such as the bi-directional digital asset point-of-sale (POS) computing device of the digital asset-based interaction system, the user computing device, the digital asset-based interaction computing entity, and the first/second/third/fourth/fifth memory element are recited at a high level of generality and are merely invoked as tools to perform storing, initiating, obtaining, determining, locking, executing, and providing steps. Simply implementing the abstract idea on a generic computer is not a practical application of the abstract idea. Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claims 1 and 10 are directed to an abstract idea.
The claims 1 and 10 do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of using the bi-directional digital asset point-of-sale (POS) computing device of the digital asset-based interaction system, the user computing device, the digital asset-based interaction computing entity, and the first/second/third/fourth/fifth memory element to perform storing, initiating, obtaining, determining, locking, executing, and providing steps amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. Therefore, the claim does not amount to significantly more than the recited abstract idea (Step 2B: NO). The claims 1 and 10 are not patent eligible.
The claims 4 and 13 recite the steps of presenting and scanning codes.
The Claims 4 and 13 recite scanning step as drafted, is process that under broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of commercial interactions and fundamental economic principles, but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting “a scanning device”, nothing in the claim element precludes the steps from practically being performed by organizing commercial interactions. For example, but for the “a scanning device” in the context of these claims encompasses a person manually reads a code to get addresses. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation by managing commercial interactions and fundamental economic principles 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 claims recite an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because presenting step is recited at a high level of generality (i.e., as a general means of displaying/showing the codes) and amounts to mere data gathering, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity. The scanning device is recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic scanning device to perform a scanning step) such that they amount no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. The claimed scanning device is not specially programmed and cannot be specially identified. Therefore, the scanning devices is not considered as “particular machine” (See MPEP § 2106.05(b)). Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claims 4 and 13 are directed to an abstract idea.
The claims 4 and 13 do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of using the scanning devices to perform presenting and scanning steps amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. Therefore, the claims do not amount to significantly more than the recited abstract idea (Step 2B: NO). The claims 4 and 13 are not patent eligible.
Claims 2-3, 5-9, 11-12, and 14-18, disclose insignificant helpful content to further describe content, such as interacting with a bi-directional digital asset POS computing device interface, providing the amount of assets comprises obtaining the amount of the digital asset, exchanges the amount of the digital asset, and providing the amount of assets to different destinations/a back account/an address/the bi-directional digital asset POS computing device, sending or directing the digital assets from an address to obtain the amount of the digital asset, verifying the first user desired assets is obtained to unlock a portion of the amount of systems digital assets, and locking an exchange rate, which are merely descriptive content to further limit the abstract idea but not make it less abstract. Thus, the claims 2-3, 5-9, 11-12, and 14-18 are directed to an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because descriptive content in claims 2-3, 5-9, 11-12, and 14-18 further limit the abstract idea but not make it less abstract. Thus, the claims 2-3, 5-9, 11-12, and 14-18 are directed to an abstract idea.
There are no additional claim element limitations recited in the claims 2-3, 5-9, 11-12, and 14-18. Therefore, the claim does not amount to significantly more than the recited abstract idea (Step 2B: NO). The claims 2-3, 5-9, 11-12, and 14-18 are 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 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 1-7, 9-16, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0118052 to Walser, in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0351289 to Gradin et al.
With regard to claims 1 and 10, Walser discloses a method comprises:
initiating, by a user computing device, a digital asset sale interaction of the digital asset-based interactions with a bi-directional digital asset point of sale (POS) computing device of the digital asset-based interaction system (Fig. 1A, paragraph 45, FIG. 1A shows an example flow diagram in an embodiment for pre-staging and executing a transaction, where a user-initiated ATM transaction is processed in a mobile app cryptocurrency wallet, exchanged via a cryptocurrency exchange, and transferred via an EFT network to an FI ATM server for withdrawal or deposit of physical fiat currency at the ATM);
obtaining, by the digital asset-based interaction computing entity, real-time information regarding the digital asset sale interaction from one or more of the bi-directional digital asset POS computing device and the user computing device, wherein the real-time information includes user computing device identification, a digital asset type of digital assets involved in the digital asset sale interaction, the amount of the digital assets, and a payment asset format (Fig. 1A, paragraphs 28, 66, and 76, As shown in step 602, the customer may select a cryptocurrency (for example Ether, ETH) available in the crypto wallet and a pre-ordered ATM withdrawal amount (for example of 80 USD) at a bank (a financial institution) and/or ATM network. Crypto wallet engine 106 in turn may trigger the sale of the selected cryptocurrency using crypto exchange service 104, typically signing the transfer transaction of the available cryptocurrency to the crypto exchange service using the private keys stored in the crypto wallet. This may enable the user to identify the ATM or POS system for the actual cash retrieval via a QR-code or near-field communication (NFC) between a mobile device and an ATM or POS system device. At the point of withdrawal 110, the recipient can be identified and authorized for the withdrawal in one embodiment through the use of a mobile device 11 (e.g. using near-field communication, or an optical code such as a QR code), in another embodiment via a transaction code that was previously issued by pre-staging service 101).);
determining, by the digital asset-based interaction computing entity, a pool of system digital assets of the stored system digital assets associated with the user computing device identification (paragraphs 28 and 29, Accordingly, this aspect of the present technology enables the identification of the invoked transaction at the ATM or POS system. As used herein, this may enable the user to identify the ATM or POS system for the actual cash retrieval via a QR-code or near-field communication (NFC) between a mobile device and an ATM or POS system device. Alternatively or in addition, performing the cryptocurrency-to-cash transaction may comprise receiving an indication of a fiat currency amount for withdrawal and a cryptocurrency to cover the fiat currency amount, transmitting, preferably via a crypto exchange interface (402) of the cryptocurrency-cash gateway, a transaction to at least one crypto exchange service to convert the cryptocurrency into the fiat currency amount, and for depositing the fiat currency amount into an intermediate account, and making the fiat currency amount from the intermediate account available for withdrawal at the ATM and/or POS system without delaying the transaction until for the fiat currency amount is deposited in the intermediate account. Examiner notes that the fiat currency amount deposited at the ATM for withdraw is considered as “a pool of system digital assets”);
determining, by the digital asset-based interaction computing entity, an amount of system digital assets of the pool of system digital assets to lock for the digital asset sale interaction based on the amount of the digital assets and the payment asset format (paragraphs 28 and 29, Examiner notes that the fiat currency amount deposited/locked at the ATM is determined for the cryptocurrency-to-cash transaction, which is considered as “determining, by the digital asset-based interaction computing entity, an amount of system digital assets of the pool of system digital assets to lock for the digital asset sale interaction based on the amount of the digital assets and the payment asset format”);
providing, by the digital asset-based interaction computing entity, the bi-directional digital asset POS computing device an amount of assets in the payment format (paragraphs 10 bd 16, Instant exchange allows for merchants and customers to lock in a local currency price. systems and methods for moving money from a crypto currency to a fiat currency in real-time using a mobile wallet or debit card to allow a customer to use the funds instantly.);
executing, by the digital asset-based interaction computing entity, a nonreal-time digital asset- based interaction process to verify the amount of the digital assets (paragraphs 4 and 14, Cryptocurrency, referred to as a form of virtual currency, is a digital asset designed to work as a medium of exchange that uses distributed ledger technology (DLT), typically embodied in the form of a blockchain, to secure its transactions, to control the creation of additional units, and to verify the transfer of assets. Overall, the process of converting cryptocurrency available in a crypto wallet (for example on a mobile device or at a cryptocurrency custody provider accessed through a mobile app or web portal) to physical cash of fiat currency at an ATM or POS system requires many steps, each step requiring time for authorization and settlement, and overall involving numerous systems—for example crypto wallet apps and/or servers, crypto exchange services, EFT networks connecting participating financial institutions (Hs), and/or credit card providers. The resulting complexity entails long processing times); and
providing, by the bi-directional digital asset POS computing device, the amount of assets in the payment asset format to the user computing device in real-time, wherein the amount of the assets is substantially equal to the amount of the digital assets (paragraphs 67-68, the customer can select first the amount of fiat currency and the desired denominations (notes or coins, e.g. “80 USS” in 4×20 US$ notes) to be withdrawn or otherwise received, followed the customer by selecting one or several of the cryptocurrencies available in the customer's crypto wallet engine 106 to be sold in order to receive the requested amount of fiat currency via a trade sell to be executed via the crypto exchange service 104).
However, Walser does not disclose storing, by a digital asset-based interaction computing entity of a digital asset-based interaction system, system digital assets to back digital asset-based interactions; locking, by the digital asset-based interaction computing entity, the amount of system digital assets.
However, Gradin teaches storing, by a digital asset-based interaction computing entity of a digital asset-based interaction system, system digital assets to back digital asset-based interactions (A multi-asset-backed bridge asset is an asset that is backed by multiple other assets, which is here referred to as backing asset or collateral., paragraph 12); locking, by the digital asset-based interaction computing entity, the amount of system digital assets (The general object of embodiments in the present disclosure is to provide a method and a system that enables a multilateral exchange in real-time and in a decentralized, trustless manner. Any kind of assets can be used as collateral. The collateralization relation can also be further ensured by cryptographic locks or hash proof locks, by relying on the collateralization relation. on exchanges when the system acts as counterparty, the exchange between the backing assets and the bridge asset happens simultaneously, where several trades are bundled into one; [0037] a collection of the backing collateral assets has been locked such that they can be extracted from the system as a result of a successful transaction or auction that fulfills the conversion relation; [0038] the lock is a cryptographic lock or hash proof lock; [0039] the lock is maintained by a distributed decentralized blockchain system. convert said system bridge assets of the respective parties to target assets requested by said parties. paragraphs 9, 12, 16, 18, 29, and 36-39).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cryptocurrency cash gateway system of Walser to include, storing, by a digital asset-based interaction computing entity of a digital asset-based interaction system, system digital assets to back digital asset-based interactions; locking, by the digital asset-based interaction computing entity, the amount of system digital assets., as taught in Gradin, in order to exchange assets with distributed trust in real-time (Gradin, abstract).
With regard to claims 2 and 11, Walser discloses interacting, by the user computing device, with a bi-directional digital asset POS computing device interface to select one or more prompts regarding the digital asset sale interaction (paragraph 87, For example, a cryptocurrency to cash transaction may be invoked by a customer of a financial institution at an ATM through the process of the customer selecting a function “cash withdrawal from crypto wallet” through the ATM user frontend.).
With regard to claims 3 and 12, Walser discloses providing the amount of assets comprises: obtaining, by the digital asset-based interaction computing entity, the amount of the digital assets from the user computing device via the bi- directional digital asset POS computing device (paragraph 76, transfer transaction of the available cryptocurrency to the crypto exchange service. Examiner notes that the selected cryptocurrency from the customer wallet account is provided to the crypto exchange service via the FI/ATM Server for the fiat currency at the identified POS device, which is considered as “obtaining, by the digital asset-based interaction computing entity, the amount of the digital assets from the user computing device via the bi- directional digital asset POS computing device”);
exchanging, by the digital asset-based interaction computing entity, the amount of the digital assets to the amount of the assets in the payment asset format (paragraphs 46, 76 and 101, the user-initiated transaction is also processed in the mobile app crypto wallet, exchanged via a cryptocurrency exchange. Crypto exchange service invoked, service executed, exchange price settled, exchange fees incurred); and
providing, by the digital asset-based interaction computing entity, the amount of the assets in the payment asset format to the bi-directional digital asset POS computing device (paragraphs 46 and 76, transferred via an EFT network to a POS server for withdrawal of physical fiat currency at a point-of-sale (POS) system, for example in a retail shop).
With regard to claims 4 and 13, Walser discloses the obtaining the amount of the digital assets from the user computing device comprises: presenting, by the bi-directional digital asset POS computing device, a scannable code to the user computing device (paragraph 87, a QR code may be shown on the ATM display); and scanning, by a scanning device of the user computing device, the scannable code, wherein scanning the scannable code pulls the amount of the digital assets from an address associated with the user computing device to an address associated with one of the bi-directional digital asset POS computing device and the digital asset-based interaction computing entity (paragraphs 76-77 and 87-88, The customer may scan the QR code of the ATM 110 using mobile device 11. In the following, the mobile wallet application, having identified the ATM via the QR code from which the “cash withdrawal from crypto wallet” transaction was just invoked, may refer to the transaction opened by the ATM server 109 through the crypto-cash gateway service 401 and provide the required steps, which are substantially similar to the steps shown in FIG. 3. Crypto wallet engine 106 in turn may trigger the sale of the selected cryptocurrency using crypto exchange service 104, typically signing the transfer transaction of the available cryptocurrency to the crypto exchange service using the private keys stored in the crypto wallet. Examiner notes that the selected cryptocurrency is transferred from the mobile wallet to the crypto exchange service and/to the ATM/POS device which is scanned to be identified, which is considered as “scanning the scannable code pulls the amount of the digital assets from an address associated with the user computing device to an address associated with one of the bi-directional digital asset POS computing device and the digital asset-based interaction computing entity”).
With regard to claims 5 and 14, Walser discloses obtaining the amount of the digital assets from the user computing device via the bi-directional digital asset POS computing device comprises one of: sending, by the bi-directional digital asset POS computing device, the amount of the digital assets from an address associated with the bi-directional digital asset POS computing device to an address associated with the digital asset-based interaction computing entity; and directing, the bi-directional digital asset POS computing device, the amount of the digital assets from an address associated with the user computing device to an address associated with the digital asset-based interaction computing entity (paragraphs 98-99 and 109-110, Transaction origin, such as an origin bank identification, and upon deposit a corresponding ATM or POS identification (for example given through a QR code or an RFID), Transaction destination address, related to a particular destination cryptocurrency (for example Bitcoin, Ethereum, Litecoin, USDC, etc.) and a destination electronic wallet address).
With regard to claims 6 and 15, Walser discloses the providing the amount of the assets in the payment asset format to the bi-directional digital asset POS computing device comprises: providing, by the digital asset-based interaction computing entity, the amount of the assets in the payment asset format to a bank account associated with the bi-directional digital asset POS computing device (paragraphs 73, 77, and 96-99, Banking server 105 may provide a portal 108, to interact with the pre-staging service 101 to initiate a payment on behalf of the customer, through an EFT network 13 for a payment of the converted fiat currency to an account 107. pre-staging service 101 may invoke the EFT transaction to transfer the funds (80 USD) on custody account 107 from banking server 105 via FI/ATM Server 109 to ATM 110.).
With regard to claims 7 and 16, Walser discloses the providing the amount of the assets in the payment asset format to the bi-directional digital asset POS computing device comprises: providing, by the digital asset-based interaction computing entity, the amount of the assets in the payment asset format to an address associated with the bi-directional digital asset POS computing device (paragraphs 96-99, Transaction destination, such as a destination bank identification or routing address, or ATM network identification, or POS or network identification, possibly including a destination account identification and currency of the account (for example, USD or EUR)).
With regard to claims 9 and 18, Walser discloses locking, by the digital asset-based interaction computing entity, an exchange rate for the type of digital asset to the payment asset format (paragraph 10, Instant exchange allows for merchants and customers to lock in a local currency price.).
Claims 8 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0118052 to Walser, in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0351289 to Gradin et al., and further in view of China Patent Application Publication No. CN 113450113 to Dai et al.
With regard to claims 8 and 17, the combination of references substantially discloses the claimed invention, however, the combination of references does not disclose executing the nonreal-time digital asset-based interaction process to verify the amount of the digital assets …; when the obtaining the amount of the digital assets is verified …: unlocking…; and when the obtaining the amount of the digital assets is not verified …: consuming… the amount of system digital assets.
However, Dai teaches executing the nonreal-time digital asset-based interaction process to verify the amount of the digital assets comprises: connecting, by the digital asset-based interaction computing entity, to a consensus network associated with the digital asset type to verify obtaining the amount of the digital assets via a verification process; when the obtaining the amount of the digital assets is verified by the verification process: unlocking, by the digital asset-based interaction computing entity, at least a portion of the amount of system digital assets; and when the obtaining the amount of the digital assets is not verified by the verification process: consuming, by the digital asset-based interaction computing entity, at least a portion of the amount of system digital assets (taking cross-chain asset transfer as example, locking a certain number of assets on the blockchain initiating and invoking the intelligent contract on the blockchain B from the blockchain A, releasing the corresponding asset on the blockchain before the asset release on the blockchain B, the blockchain be obtained from the blockchain A can be successfully locked; if the blockchain B obtains and verifies the asset locking information on the blockchain A, the intelligent contract on the blockchain B performs asset release operation; if the intelligent contract on the blockchain B is not executed successfully, blockchain obtaining the asset release failure information on the blockchain B, unlocking the locked asset. Examiner notes that blockchain transaction verification processing takes long time. Therefore, it’s obvious that blockchain transaction verification is a nonreal-time processing. Examiner notes that before the corresponding locked asset on blockchain B can be released, the blockchain B obtains and verifies the amount of assets receiving from the blockchain A has been locked; and therefore, the blockchain B does not obtain and verify the amount of assets receiving from the blockchain A, the corresponding locked asset on blockchain B can not be released (i.e., locked, consuming), which is considered as “the obtaining the amount of the digital assets is verified …: unlocking…; and when the obtaining the amount of the digital assets is not verified …: consuming… the amount of system digital assets”, page 3, lines 40-47).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of references to include, executing the nonreal-time digital asset-based interaction process to verify the amount of the digital assets …; when the obtaining the amount of the digital assets is verified …: unlocking…; and when the obtaining the amount of the digital assets is not verified …: consuming… the amount of system digital assets, as taught in Dai, in order to optimize the operation performance of the intelligent contract by the concurrent execution method, so as to simplify the development of the intelligent contract and improving the interoperation ability (Dai, page 2, lines 33-35).
Response to Arguments
Applicants' arguments filed on 09/22/2026 have been fully considered but they are not fully persuasive especially in light of the previously references used in the rejections.
The examiner’s rejections are affirmed by Patent Board on 07/27/26 based on reply brief filed on 06/23/2025 and 11/20/2025.
Applicants remark that “The Applicant believes that the claims, as amended, overcome the present rejection”.
Examiner directs Applicants' attention to the office action above.
Conclusion
Please refer to form 892 for cited references.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARIEL J YU whose telephone number is (571)270-3312. The examiner can normally be reached 11AM - 7PM (M-F).
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Obeid Fahd A can be reached on 571-270-3324. 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.
/ARIEL J YU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627
