DETAILED ACTION
Status of Application
This action is a Non-Final Rejection. This action is in response to the request for continued examination filed on June 17, 2026.
Claims 1, 9, and 16 are amended.
Claims 1-20 are pending and rejected.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . 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.
Priority
Support for the independent claims could not be found in priority application number 16/517,994 or provisional application number 62/701,798. Therefore, the priority date for the pending claims is October 12, 2022.
Response to Arguments
Regarding step 2A, prong one, of the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 101, Applicant argues that the limitations of ‘at least one NFT’ and ‘at least one cryptocurrency wallet’ are additional elements. Remarks at 11. These claim features were previously designated as part of the abstract idea, while the technology used to implement them was an additional element. These features are redesignated as additional elements. However, because the technology being used for the NFTs and wallets was already being considered as additional elements, this does not affect the eligibility analysis under steps 2A, prong two, and 2B.
Regarding step 2A, prong two, Applicant argues that “the specification as filed provides said details to highlight the security improvement provided by the present invention.” Remarks at 15. Applicant points to paragraphs 00154 and 00166 of the Specification, which point out the security benefits of the distributed digital ledger and benefits of NFTs. Id. However, these paragraphs do not describe a technological improvement made by Applicant with respect to the claimed invention. Instead, these are general benefits of existing technology. For example, Applicant is asserting that existing technology is being used to provide greater data security and not that Applicant has improved technology that is used for data security.
Applicant further argues that “the claimed invention solves the technological problem of tampering or hacking of time-restricted video conferencing, so as to prevent one from unauthorizedly obtaining more time or credit towards said video conferencing.” Remarks at 17. Although this is a problem relating to the use of technology, it is a business problem and not a technological problem. Technology is being used as a tool for time-restricted video conferencing.
Regarding step 2B, Applicant points to MPEP 2106.05(f) and the three considerations that examiners may use. Remarks at 19-22. With respect to the first consideration, Applicant asserts that “the claimed invention recites far more than the idea of a solution or outcome. Instead the claimed invention recites details about how the improvement to security and prevention against tampering and hacking of the audio and/or video call authorization is accomplished.” Id. at 19. However, for example, neither the claims nor the specification describe improvements to technology that prevent hacking.
With respect to the second consideration, Applicant argues that “the claimed invention provides [an] improvement to computer capabilities and technological improvement. The claim does not use a computer in its ordinary capacity to perform an existing process, as the use of NFTs to support time-limited authorized video conferencing in a manner averse to hacking or tampering is not an existing non-technological process.” Remarks at 20. However, Applicant has not shown that a computer is not being used in its ordinary capacity. For example, a programmed general purpose computing device may be used to implement the abstract idea.
With respect to the third consideration, Applicant argues that “the claimed invention is defined at a level of specificity such that it lacks broad applicability over many fields of endeavor and amounts to more than a recitation of the words ‘apply it’.” Remarks at 21. Although limitations that confine the judicial exception to a particular field of endeavor may amount to significantly more, a claim that is utilizing a programmed general purpose computing device to implement an abstract idea does not amount to significantly more.
Applicant further argues that “Example 35 is still eligible under the revised 2019 PEG guidance.” Remarks at 23. The prior Office action noted that it is still eligible but should be used with caution. Claim 2 of Example 35 is distinct from the instant claims because it had combination of limitations that included both an ATM and a mobile communication device that are required for the claimed process. On the other hand, the instant claims recite limitations performed by a server, i.e., a programmed general purpose computing device.
Applicant further argues that “[a]dditional elements which rise above well-understood, routine, or conventional activity are always a consideration at Step 2B, as shown in MPEP 2106.05(I)(A).” Remarks at 24. However, “well-understood, routine, or conventional” is one of several considerations, but it is not the only consideration. See MPEP 2106.05(A) (“The Supreme Court has identified a number of considerations as relevant to the evaluation of whether the claimed additional elements amount to an inventive concept. The list of considerations here is not intended to be exclusive or limiting. Additional elements can often be analyzed based on more than one type of consideration and the type of consideration is of no import to the eligibility analysis. Additional discussion of these considerations, and how they were applied in particular judicial decisions, is provided in in MPEP § 2106.05(a) through (h).”).
Applicant states that “[s]ince the Office Action does not include an express rejection showing the additional elements as well-understood, routine, or conventional, Applicant currently understands that the additional elements are found to not be well-understood, routine, or conventional.” Remarks at 26. This statement is not accurate as no determination as to whether the additional elements are well understood, routine, or conventional has been made.
As such, the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101 has been maintained.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1: Does the Claim Fall within a Statutory Category? (see MPEP 2106.03)
Yes, with respect to claims 1-20, which recite “[a] system…comprising: a server platform….wherein the server platform comprises a processor….”
Step 2A, Prong One: Is a Judicial Exception Recited? (see MPEP 2106.04(a))
The following claims identify the limitations that recite the abstract idea in regular text and that recite additional elements in bold:
1. A system for tokenized communication with experts via non-fungible tokens (NFTs), comprising:
a server platform configured for network communication with a plurality of user devices;
wherein the server platform comprises a processor, an audio and/or video chat interface, and at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium having at least one computer program stored therein;
wherein the at least one computer program, when executed by the processor, causes the server platform to perform the steps of:
generating a plurality of user profiles, wherein each of the plurality of user profiles is associated with at least one cryptocurrency wallet;
generating a private key for each of the least one cryptocurrency wallet using a cryptographic algorithm with random input;
minting at least one NFT corresponding to a time allotment for an audio and/or video call with a first user profile of the plurality of user profiles;
generating a digital signature for each of the at least one NFT using a cryptographic hash and the private key;
generating the audio and/or video call between the first user profile and at least one second user profile through the at least one audio and/or video chat interface;
automatically verifying through a distributed network that the at least one cryptocurrency wallet associated with the at least one second user profile includes at least one NFT corresponding to the time allotment for the audio and/or video call with the first user profile, based on the private key associated with the at least one cryptocurrency wallet and the digital signature associated with the at least one NFT;
automatically transferring one of the at least one NFT corresponding to the time allotment for the audio and/or video call with the first user profile to a burn wallet upon commencement of the audio and/or video call; and
automatically transferring at least one additional NFT of the at least one NFT corresponding to the time allotment for the audio and/or video call with the first user profile to the burn wallet after a duration of the audio and/or video call has exceeded the time allotment.
2. The system of claim 1, wherein the at least one first user profile includes a plurality of user profiles associated with designated expert users.
3. The system of claim 1, wherein the at least one second user profile includes a plurality of second user profiles, and wherein the at least one computer program, when executed by the processor, further causes the server platform to automatically verify that the at least one cryptocurrency wallet of each of the plurality of second user profiles includes at least one NFT corresponding to the time with the at least one first user profile.
4. The system of claim 1, wherein the at least one computer program, when executed by the processor, further causes the server platform to automatically end the audio and/or video call after a preset time period after a final one of the at least one NFT corresponding to the time with the at least one first user profile is transferred to a burn wallet.
5. The system of claim 1, wherein the at least one computer program, when executed by the processor, further causes the server platform to automatically transmit a warning notification to a user device corresponding to the at least one second user profile before the at least one additional NFT is transferred to the burn wallet.
6. The system of claim 1, wherein one or more of the at least one NFT corresponds to a specific time slot on one or more dates.
7. The system of claim 1, wherein if the verification of the at least one cryptocurrency wallet associated with the at least one second user profile fails, then the audio and/or video call does not commence.
8. The system of claim 1, wherein the server platform includes at least one NFT marketplace, wherein the at least one computer program, when executed by the processor, further causes the server platform to accept requests to purchase and/or exchange NFTs on the at least one NFT marketplace and automatically transfer funds corresponding to the purchase of the NFTs to a financial account and/or cryptocurrency wallet of at least one creator of the NFTs.
9. A system for tokenized communication with experts via non-fungible tokens (NFTs), comprising:
a server platform configured for network communication with a plurality of user devices;
wherein the server platform comprises a processor, an audio and/or video chat interface, and at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium having at least one computer program stored therein;
wherein the at least one computer program, when executed by the processor, causes the server platform to perform the steps of:
generating a plurality of user profiles, wherein each of the plurality of user profiles is associated with at least one cryptocurrency wallet;
generating a private key for each of the least one cryptocurrency wallet using a cryptographic algorithm with random input;
minting at least one NFT corresponding to a time allotment for an audio and/or video call with a first user profile of the plurality of user profiles;
generating a digital signature for each of the at least one NFT using a cryptographic hash and the private key;
generating the audio and/or video call between the first user profile and a plurality of second user profiles through the at least one audio and/or video chat interface;
automatically verifying through a distributed network that the at least one cryptocurrency wallet associated with each of the plurality of second user profiles includes at least one NFT corresponding to the time allotment for the audio and/or video call with the first user profile, based on the private key associated with the at least one cryptocurrency wallet and the digital signature associated with the at least one NFT; and
automatically transferring, for each of the plurality of second user profiles, one of the at least one NFT corresponding to the time allotment for the audio and/or video call with the first user profile to a burn wallet upon commencement of the audio and/or video call.
10. The system of claim 9, wherein one or more of the at least one NFT corresponds to a specific time slot on one or more dates.
11. The system of claim 9, wherein if the verification of the at least one cryptocurrency wallet associated with the plurality of second user profiles fails, then the audio and/or video call does not commence.
12. The system of claim 9, wherein the server platform includes at least one NFT marketplace, wherein the at least one computer program, when executed by the processor, further causes the server platform to accept requests to purchase and/or exchange NFTs on the at least one NFT marketplace and automatically transfer funds corresponding to the purchase of the NFTs to a financial account and/or cryptocurrency wallet of at least one creator of the NFTs.
13. The system of claim 9, wherein the at least one computer program, when executed by the processor, further causes the server platform to automatically transmit a warning notification to a user device corresponding to the plurality of second user profiles before the at least one additional NFT is transferred to the burn wallet.
14. The system of claim 9, wherein the at least one first user profile includes a plurality of user profiles associated with designated expert users.
15. The system of claim 9, wherein the at least one computer program, when executed by the processor, further causes the server platform to automatically end the audio and/or video call after a preset time period after a final one of the at least one NFT corresponding to the time with the at least one first user profile is transferred to a burn wallet.
16. A system for tokenized communication with experts via non-fungible tokens (NFTs), comprising:
a server platform configured for network communication with a plurality of user devices;
wherein the server platform comprises a processor, an audio and/or video chat interface, and at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium having at least one computer program stored therein;
wherein the at least one computer program, when executed by the processor, causes the server platform to perform the steps of:
generating a plurality of user profiles, wherein each of the plurality of user profiles is associated with at least one cryptocurrency wallet;
generating a private key for each of the least one cryptocurrency wallet using a cryptographic algorithm with random input;
minting at least one NFT corresponding to a time allotment for an audio and/or video call with a first user profile of the plurality of user profiles;
generating a digital signature for each of the at least one NFT using a cryptographic hash and the private key;
generating the audio and/or video call between the first user profile and at least one second user profile through the at least one audio and/or video chat interface;
automatically verifying through a distributed network that the at least one cryptocurrency wallet associated with the at least one second user profile includes at least one NFT corresponding to the time allotment for the audio and/or video call with the first user profile based on the private key associated with the at least one cryptocurrency wallet and the digital signature associated with the at least one NFT;
automatically transferring one of the at least one NFT corresponding to the time allotment for the audio and/or video call with the first user profile to a burn wallet upon commencement of the audio and/or video call; and
automatically transmitting a warning notification to a user device corresponding to the at least one second user profile before at least one additional NFT is transferred to the burn wallet.
17. The system of claim 16, wherein one or more of the at least one NFT corresponds to a specific time slot on one or more dates.
18. The system of claim 16, wherein if the verification of the at least one cryptocurrency wallet associated with the at least one second user profile fails, then the audio and/or video call does not commence.
19. The system of claim 16, wherein the at least one computer program, when executed by the processor, further causes the server platform to automatically end the audio and/or video call after a preset time period after a final one of the at least one NFT corresponding to the time with the at least one first user profile is transferred to a burn wallet.
20. The system of claim 16, wherein the server platform includes at least one NFT marketplace, wherein the at least one computer program, when executed by the processor, further causes the server platform to accept requests to purchase and/or exchange NFTs on the at least one NFT marketplace and automatically transfer funds corresponding to the purchase of the NFTs to a financial account and/or cryptocurrency wallet of at least one creator of the NFTs.
Yes. But for the recited additional elements as shown above in bold, the remaining limitations of the claims recite certain methods of organizing human activity. The claims are directed to tokenization of expert time. This type of method of organizing human activity is a commercial interaction such as agreements in the form of contracts, legal obligations, marketing or sales activities or behaviors, and business relations. This type of method of organizing human activity is also managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people such as social activities and teaching. Thus, the claims recite an abstract idea.
Step 2A, Prong Two: Is the Abstract Idea Integrated into a Practical Application? (see MPEP 2106.04(d))
No. The claims as a whole merely use a computer as a tool to perform the abstract idea. The computing components (i.e., additional elements that are in bold above) are recited at a high level of generality and are merely invoked as a tool to implement the steps. For example, only a programmed general purpose computing device (i.e., claimed server platform) is needed to implement the claimed process. Simply implementing the abstract idea on a generic computer or cloud server is not a practical application of the abstract idea. Additionally, there is no improvement to the functioning of a computer or technology. Therefore, the abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application.
Step 2B: Does the Claim Provide an Inventive Concept? (see MPEP 2106.05)
No. As discussed with respect to Step 2A, Prong 2, the additional elements in the claims, both individually and in combination, amount to no more than tools to perform the abstract idea. Merely performing the abstract idea using a computer cannot provide an inventive concept. Therefore, the claims do not provide an inventive concept.
As such, the claims are not patent eligible.
Relevant Prior Art
The following references are relevant to Applicant’s invention:
Paek et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2008/0010124 A1. This reference teaches an invention for managing commitments of time across a network. A connection token that has a plurality of defined terms and is representative of a commitment of time for a user in exchange for a fee is created, managed, and executed.
Fieldman, U.S. Patent Number 9,483,805 B1. This reference teaches a method of limiting tokens for use by a student within an education application.
Monadjem, U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2024/0070327 A1. This reference teaches a method for sharing athlete data of users on a data-sharing platform by issuing digital tokens that have a monetary value.
Dalmia et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2023/0055064 A1. This reference teaches gaming solutions using NFTs and a digital ledger to manage aspects of gameplay. Paragraph 0158 discloses that time and spend parameters are applied to the NFT. Paragraph 0160 discloses an alert to remind a user to recharge an NFT.
Tang et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2023/0108610 A1. This reference teaches a burn wallet. See paragraph 0027 (“As disclosed herein the terms “burn,” “burned,” “burning,” and the like refer to a process where a token (e.g., a NFT) can be sent to a burn wallet or null/eater address, which is a cryptographic wallet that is only capable of receiving tokens but not sending tokens. The “burning” process ensures that the token is effectively locked and taken out of circulation, which is often referred to as destroying the token. The “burning” transaction is confirmed on the blockchain ledger, which ensures that the “burn” is permanent and irrevocable.”).
Howell, James. “Utility NFTs – The Future of NFTs,” https://101blockchains.com/utility-nfts/ (July 4, 2022). This reference teaches utility NFTs and provides examples such as in social spaces.
Email Communications
Per MPEP 502.03, Applicant may authorize email communications by filing Form PTO/SB/439, available at https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/sb0439.pdf, via the USPTO patent electronic filing system.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH H ROSEN whose telephone number is (571) 270-1850 and email address is elizabeth.rosen@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 10 AM ET - 7 PM 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, Michael Anderson, can be reached at 571-270-0508. 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.
/ELIZABETH H ROSEN/Primary Examiner, 3693
Prosecution Insights