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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 03/10/2026 has been entered.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-2, and 12-13 are amended.
Claims 21-22 are canceled.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Response to Remarks
35 U.S.C. § 101
Remark 1: On page 11 of Remarks, Applicant contends that the claims are not directed to mental process or a process that could be practically performed in the human mind.
Response to Remark 1: This argument is moot as only the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping is relied upon.
Remark 2: On pages 12-15 of Remarks, Applicant contends that amended claim 1 provides a technical solution to a protocol-level technical problem in decentralized, pseudonymous networks. Essentially the claimed invention is tied to the technical field of blockchain and cryptography and addresses problems that exist precisely because of the cryptographic and decentralized design of blockchains. Characterizing the invention as “fundamental economic practice” misdescribes the problem, as conventional economic settlement presumes identifiable counterparties and centralized ledgers, whereas cryptocurrency transactions intentionally omit identity and use public-key cryptography, such that the technical problem and the solution are unique to the blockchain stack, not to commerce generally. The claimed features materially alter how the computer system acquires, computes, controls access to, and renders compliance telemetry in a decentralized network-functions. Each claimed element restricts the system’s operation in ways that materially change how data is processed and exposed in a blockchain computing environment. Thus, in view of these remarks, the substance of the invention includes technical improvements in the field of “blockchain and cryptography” so as to improve the functioning of systems that handle blockchain transactions by enabling real-time, event-conditioned identity status computation, selective disclosure without persistent storage, and secure indication via public keys.
Response to Remark 2: Applicant's argument is not persuasive because these features are part of the additional elements discussed in Step 2A, Prong Two.
Remark 3: On page 17 of Remarks, Applicant contends that the claimed operations change how the system allocates resources (processing on event triggers rather than constant collection), how it controls data (non-persistent, transaction visibility), and how it communicates securely (public-key indication), thereby integrating the exception into a specific technical solution that operates on and with blockchain data structures and cryptographic primitives.
Response to Remark 3: Examiner respectfully disagrees. First, Applicant’s argument is not persuasive because the features of the abstract idea cannot integrate an abstract idea into a practical application. Second, what applicant contends is an improvement is merely an improvement in the recited abstract idea, and not an improvement in the functioning of computers, nor technology, nor a technical field. Moreover, a general-purpose computer would be capable of performing these same operations of a mere improvement in the abstract idea. Here, the additional elements individually and in combination, are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea (MPEP § 2106.05(f)) and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment (MPEP § 2106.05(h)). The description of the additional elements evidences that they are generic and conventional elements used as tools to perform the abstract idea (See Spec. 0028-0048). Accordingly, this contention is unpersuasive.
Remark 4: On page 18-20 of Remarks, Applicant contends that amended claim 1, when taken as a whole, qualifies as significantly more than an abstract idea.
Response to Remark 4: Examiner respectfully disagrees. Individually, the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. As discussed previously, the description of the additional elements evidences that they are generic and conventional elements used as tools to perform the abstract idea (See Spec. 0028-0048). There is nothing in the Specification to indicate that the operations recited in the claims require any specialized hardware or inventive computer components or that the claimed invention is implemented using other than generic computer components to perform generic computer functions. As such, the additional elements merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The ordered combination recites no more than the individual elements do. Thus, the additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea. Accordingly, the claims are directed to the abstract idea identified above without significantly more. The claims are not eligible, warranting a rejection for lack of subject matter eligibility and concluding the eligibility analysis. Accordingly, this contention is unpersuasive.
Remark 5: Applicant makes various arguments referring to “modules” of the system as providing an improvement.
Response to Remark 4: The claims fail to reflect what applicant contends is an improvement. That is, the claims do not include the modules. Accordingly, these contentions are unpersuasive.
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 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1
Step 1 of the eligibility analysis asks is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter (See MPEP § 2106.03, subsections I and II). Claims 1-11 are directed to a computer-implemented system (i.e., machine, and manufacture). Claims 12-20 are directed to a computer-implemented method (i.e., process). Therefore, these claims fall within the four statutory categories of invention.
Step 2A, Prong One
Prong One asks does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon (MPEP § 2106.04(II)(A)(1)). Claims 1 and 12 under a broadest reasonable interpretation recite an abstract idea because the claims describe determining profile status and wallet score based on the profile status, indication thereof, and profile KYC verification, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas (MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2), subsection II). The claim limitations reciting the abstract idea are grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas because the limitations describe fundamental economic principles or practices, including mitigating risk, and describe commercial or legal interactions, including advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors, and describe managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people, including following rules or instructions. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
Claim 1:
a processor; and
a memory storing instructions that, when executed by the processor, causes the processor to:
receive a first profile and at least one digital wallet from at least one blockchain from the blockchain ecosystem, associated with the first profile;
receive at least one of a mobile number, an email address, a biometric information, an authentication information, and a third-party user ID, from the first profile;
determine a status for the first profile, based on a verification information, wherein the status is represented as a level indicator and updated upon submission of cryptographically verifiable documents (CVD) or verifiable credentials;
calculate a score for the at least one digital wallet associated with the first profile,
wherein the score is dynamically calculated based on a status of a second profile performing a blockchain transaction in the at least one digital wallet associated with the first profile and further based on regulatory risk factors including country risk and transaction amount risk;
conditionally provide private Know Your Customer (KYC) information of the second profile to the first profile, upon receiving the blockchain transaction from the second profile in the at least one digital wallet associated with the first profile, wherein the private KYC information is not persistently stored in the first profile; and
indicate the status of the first profile, the second profile and/or the score associated with any digital wallet on any public blockchain using a public key of the at least one digital wallet to enable secure viewing of profile status without exposing private credentials.
Claim 12:
receiving, a first profile and at least one digital wallet from at least one blockchain from the blockchain ecosystem, associated with the first profile;
receiving, at least one of mobile number, email address, biometric information, authentication information, third party user ID, and alike from the first profile;
determining, a status for the first profile, based on a verification information, wherein the status is represented as a level indicator and updated upon submission of cryptographically verifiable documents (CVD) or verifiable credentials;
calculating, a score for the at least one digital wallet associated with the first profile;
wherein the score is dynamically calculated based on a status of second profile performing a blockchain transaction in the at least one digital wallet associated with the first profile and further based on regulatory risk factors including country risk and transaction amount risk;
providing conditionally, private Know Your Customer (KYC) information of the second profile to the first profile, upon receiving the blockchain transaction from the second profile in the at least one digital wallet associated with the first profile, wherein the private KYC information is not persistently stored in the first profile;
indicating, the status of the first profile, the second profile and/or the score associated with any digital wallet on any public blockchain using a public key of the at least one digital wallet to enable secure viewing of profile status without exposing private credentials.
Step 2A, Prong Two
Prong Two asks does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application (MPEP § 2106.04(II)(A)(2)). Here, the additional elements individually and in combination, are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional elements merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea (MPEP § 2106.05(f)) and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment (MPEP § 2106.05(h)). The description of the additional elements evidences that they are generic and conventional elements used as tools to perform the abstract idea (See Spec. 0028-0048). These additional elements do not improve the functioning of computers, another technology, or a technical field (MPEP §§ 2106.04(d)(1) and 2106.05(a)). They do not apply the abstract idea to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition (MPEP § 2106.04(d)(2)). They do not implement the abstract idea with a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim (MPEP § 2106.05(b)). They do not transform or reduce a particular article to a different state or thing (MPEP § 2106.05(c)). Nor do they apply the abstract idea in a meaningful way or impose a meaningful limit on it beyond linking its use to a particular technological environment (MPEP § 2106.05(e)). Such a generic computer implementation does not make the abstract idea patent eligible because a wholly generic computer implementation is not generally the sort of additional feature that provides any practical assurance that the process is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the abstract idea itself. The Specification and the claim language provide evidence that the focus of the claim is not on a specific improvement in technology but rather on a scheme, for which generic and conventional elements are invoked merely as a tool to implement the abstract idea and link it to a particular field of use. Even if the Specification describes technical improvements, they are not claimed. Thus, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Accordingly, the claims are directed to the abstract idea identified above.
Step 2B
Step 2B determines whether the claim as a whole amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself (MPEP § 2106.05). Evaluating additional elements to determine whether they amount to an inventive concept requires considering them both individually and in combination to ensure that they amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. Individually, the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. As discussed previously, the description of the additional elements evidences that they are generic and conventional elements used as tools to perform the abstract idea (See Spec. 0028-0048). There is nothing in the Specification to indicate that the operations recited in the claims require any specialized hardware or inventive computer components or that the claimed invention is implemented using other than generic computer components to perform generic computer functions. As such, the additional elements merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The ordered combination recites no more than the individual elements do. Thus, the additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea. Accordingly, the claims are directed to the abstract idea identified above without significantly more. The claims are not eligible, warranting a rejection for lack of subject matter eligibility and concluding the eligibility analysis.
Dependent Claims
Claim 2 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes determining profile status and wallet score based on the profile status, indication thereof, and profile KYC verification and ownership verification, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein execution of the instructions further causes the processor to:
determine ownership for the at least one digital wallet associated with the first profile, the determining comprising:
processing the blockchain transaction, wherein the blockchain transaction is indicative of having a cryptocurrency amount transferred from the at least one digital wallet associated with the first profile; or
submitting the CVD) or verifiable credentials, wherein the CVD is indicative of verifying ownership of the at least one digital wallet associated with the first profile.
Claim 3 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes determining profile status and wallet score based on the profile status, indication thereof, and profile KYC verification and ownership verification and identity verification, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein execution of the instructions further causes the processor to:
verify the identity of the first profile based on the verification information;
wherein the verification information comprises the CVD; and
updating the status of the first profile, wherein the status of the first profile indicates successful submission of the CVD by the first profile.
Claim 4 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes determining profile status and wallet score based on the profile status, indication thereof, and profile KYC verification and identity verification, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein execution of the instructions further causes the processor to:
verify the identity of the first profile based on the verification information, wherein the verification information comprises a KYC information, biometric information, MSISDN, social media handle, email, or other GUID;
updating the status of the first profile, wherein the status of the first profile indicates successful submission of know-your-customer facility, a biometric information, an MSISDN, a social media handle, an email, or other GUID by the first profile.
Claim 5 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes determining profile status and wallet score based on the profile status, indication thereof, and profile KYC verification and profile notifications, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein execution of the instructions further causes the processor to:
provide a notification to the first profile, wherein the notification comprises an information of the second profile, the status of the second profile;
receive a contact information of the second profile from the first profile and
transmit a message to the second profile using the contact information for updating the status of the second profile and/or associate a plurality of digital wallets to the second profile.
Claim 6 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes determining profile status and wallet score based on the profile status, indication thereof, and profile KYC verification and profile notifications, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein execution of the instructions further causes the processor to:
provide a notification to the second profile, wherein the second profile views the notification comprising a certain public information of the first profile and the status of the first profile;
receive a contact information of the first profile from the second profile; and
transmit a message to the first profile using the contact information for updating the status of the first profile.
Claim 7 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes determining profile status and wallet score based on the profile status, indication thereof, and profile KYC verification and profile notifications and status notifications, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein execution of the instructions further causes the processor to:
transmit a message to one of an external agency or an institution after a predetermined criteria if the status of the second profile is not updated.
Claim 8 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes determining profile status and wallet score based on the profile status, indication thereof, and profile KYC verification and profile notifications and blacklisting, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein execution of the instructions further causes the processor to:
tagging the plurality of digital wallets or the status of the second profile as potentially associated with blacklisted transaction upon at least one of:
(a) determining that one of the plurality of digital wallets processing the blockchain transaction in the cluster of related transactions is contained on a public or private blacklist;
(b) determining that the second profile associated with the plurality of digital wallets processing the blockchain transaction in the cluster of related transactions is associated with a sanctions list or sanctioned country; and
(c) determining that the second profile associated with the plurality of digital wallets processing the blockchain transaction in the cluster of related transactions is associated with a transaction amount over a predetermined threshold and the status of the second profile is not updated after the predetermined criteria.
Claim 9 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes determining profile status and wallet score based on the profile status, indication thereof, and profile KYC verification and score considerations, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein execution of the instructions further causes the processor to
take into consideration, risk of country, risk of amounts, and other risk as per guidelines of regulators for calculating the score for the at least one digital wallet associated with the first profile.
Claim 10 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes determining profile status and wallet score based on the profile status, indication thereof, and profile KYC verification and transaction information exchange, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein execution of the instructions further causes the processor to
exchange public and private transaction information between the first profile and the second profile;
wherein the private transaction information comprises at least one of, tax information, invoice, and transaction amount provided by the second profile; and
wherein the public transaction information comprising at least one of, jurisdiction, tax amount, transaction status, tax jurisdiction.
Claim 11 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes determining profile status and wallet score based on the profile status, indication thereof, and profile KYC verification and KYC verification, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein execution of the instructions further causes the processor to
provide private KYC information of the first profile to the second profile, upon receiving the blockchain transaction from the second profile in the digital wallet associated with the first profile.
Claim 13 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes determining profile status and wallet score based on the profile status, indication thereof, and profile KYC verification and ownership verification, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
determining ownership for the at least one digital wallet associated with the first profile, comprising:
processing the blockchain transaction, wherein the blockchain transaction is indicative of having a cryptocurrency amount transferred from the at least one digital wallet associated with the first profile; or
submitting the CVD or verifiable credentials, wherein the CVD is indicative of verifying ownership of the at least one digital wallet associated with the first profile.
Claim 14 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes determining profile status and wallet score based on the profile status, indication thereof, and profile KYC verification and ownership verification and identity verification, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
verifying the identity of the first profile based on the verification information,
wherein the verification information comprises of the CVD; and
updating the status of the first profile, wherein the status of the first profile indicates successful submission of the CVD by the first profile.
Claim 15 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes determining profile status and wallet score based on the profile status, indication thereof, and profile KYC verification and identity verification, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
verifying the identity of the first profile based on the verification information,
wherein the verification information comprising of a KYC information, biometric information, MSISDN, social media handle, email, or other GUID;
updating the status of the first profile, wherein the status of the first profile indicates successful submission of know-your-customer facility, biometric information, MSISDN, social media handle, email or other GUID by the first profile.
Claim 16 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes determining profile status and wallet score based on the profile status, indication thereof, and profile KYC verification and profile notifications, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
providing a notification to the first profile, wherein the notification comprising of an information of second profile, the status of second profile;
receiving a contact information of the second profile from the first profile; and
transmitting a message to the second profile using the contact information for updating the status of the second profile and/or associate a plurality of digital wallets to the second profile.
Claim 17 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes determining profile status and wallet score based on the profile status, indication thereof, and profile KYC verification and profile notifications, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
providing a notification to the second profile, wherein the second profile views the notification comprising of a certain public information of the first profile, the status of the first profile;
receiving a contact information of the first profile from the second profile; and
transmitting a message to the first profile using the contact information for updating the status of the first profile.
Claim 18 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes determining profile status and wallet score based on the profile status, indication thereof, and profile KYC verification and profile notifications and status notifications, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
transmitting a message to an external agency or institution after a predetermined criteria if the status of the second profile is not updated.
Claim 19 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes determining profile status and wallet score based on the profile status, indication thereof, and profile KYC verification and profile notifications and blacklisting, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
tagging the plurality of digital wallets or the status of the second profile as potentially associated with blacklisted transaction upon at least one of:
(a) determining that one of the plurality of digital wallets processing the blockchain transaction in the cluster of related transactions is contained on a public or private blacklist;
(b) determining that the second profile associated with the plurality of digital wallets processing the blockchain transaction in the cluster of related transactions is associated with a sanctions list or sanctioned country; and
(c) determining that the second profile associated with the plurality of digital wallets processing the blockchain transaction in the cluster of related transactions is associated with a transaction amount over a predetermined threshold and the status of the second profile is not updated after the predetermined criteria.
Claim 20 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes determining profile status and wallet score based on the profile status, indication thereof, and profile KYC verification and score considerations, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein taking into consideration risk of country, risk of amounts, and other risk as per guidelines of regulators for calculating the score for the at least one digital wallet associated with the first profile.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Unclear Scope
Claim 1 is directed to a product (e.g., "A digital wallet verification system … the system comprising: ...”). For products, the claim limitations will define discrete physical structures or materials (See MPEP 2103(I)(C)). Here, claim 1 recites that the "system" comprises structural recitations of “a processor; and a memory”. However, the "system" also comprises functions (e.g., “determine a status for the first profile, based on a verification information, wherein the status is represented as a level indicator and updated upon submission of cryptographically verifiable documents (CVD) or verifiable credentials”, “wherein the score is dynamically calculated …” and “indicate the status of the first profile, the second profile and/or the score associated with any digital wallet on any public blockchain using a public key of the at least one digital wallet to enable secure viewing of profile status without exposing private credentials”) where it is unclear what claimed structural recitations of the "system" these functions are attributed to, if any. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. See In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319, 13USPQ2d 1320 (Fed. Cir. 1989) and MPEP 2173.02 (III)(B) which states “Examiners should bear in mind that "[a]n essential purpose of patent examination is to fashion claims that are precise, clear, correct, and unambiguous. Only in this way can uncertainties of claim scope be removed, as much as possible, during the administrative process.”
Claims 2-11 are also rejected per dependency upon a rejected claim.
Lack of Antecedent Basis
Claims 1-11 recite "the system" without proper antecedent basis. Appropriate correction is needed. Therefore, these claims are indefinite and are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Claims 2-11 are also rejected per dependency upon a rejected claim.
Claims Free of Art
The closest prior art of record is US 2020/0160455 A1 to Singh et al. (“Singh”). Singh discloses a method and system comprising:
a processor; and a memory storing instructions that, when executed by the processor, causes the processor to (paras 0067-0068)
receive a first profile and at least one digital wallet from at least one blockchain from the blockchain ecosystem, associated with the first profile (paras 0030, 0034)
receive at least one of a mobile number, an email address, a biometric information, an authentication information, and a third-party user ID, from the first profile (paras 0036-0037, 0049)
determine a status for the first profile, based on a verification information, wherein the status is represented as a level indicator and updated upon submission of cryptographically verifiable documents (CVD) or verifiable credentials (paras 0035, 0046, 0051, 0056-0057)
indicate the status of the first profile, the second profile and/or the score associated with any digital wallet on any public blockchain (paras 0033, 0048, 0055, 0058)
Therefore, the prior art does not teach, neither singly nor in combination the following:
calculate a score for the at least one digital wallet associated with the first profile, wherein the score is dynamically calculated based on a status of a second profile performing a blockchain transaction in the at least one digital wallet associated with the first profile and further based on regulatory risk factors including country risk and transaction amount risk
conditionally provide private Know Your Customer (KYC) information of the second profile to the first profile, upon receiving the blockchain transaction from the second profile in the at least one digital wallet associated with the first profile, wherein the private KYC information is not persistently stored in the first profile
Conclusion
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 10,812,254 B2 to Chari et al. discloses: A processor-implemented method provides a calculated identity confidence score for an identity. The processor(s) in each of a plurality of decentralized identity providers calculate an identity confidence score of an entity. The processor(s) store the calculated identity confidence score in a blockchain. The processor(s) retrieve the calculated identity confidence score from the blockchain. The processor(s) provide the calculated identity confidence score to a requestor, which is a computer-based system that performs an action based on the provided calculated identity score.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ari Shahabi whose telephone number is (571)272-2565. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8:00-5:00.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, John W Hayes can be reached at 571-272-6708. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ARI SHAHABI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3697