DETAILED ACTION
The present application 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.
This Office Action is in response Applicant communication filed on 6/17/2026.
Claims
Claims 1 and 11 have been amended.
Claims 9 and 13 has been cancelled.
Claim 20 has been withdrawn from consideration.
Claims 1-8, 10-12, and 14-20 are currently pending in the application.
Information Disclosure Statements
The Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) that was filed on 4/15/2026 has been considered.
Response to Arguments
103
The applicant argues that the cited references do not disclose the amendments to claims 1 and 11. Specifically the applicant argues that the combination of Dalmia/Copeland/Saunkeah/Pappas does not disclose the limitation “providing, by the processor computer device, the non-fungible token to the user device…” (see applicant’s arguments on pages 9-11).
However the examiner respectfully disagrees. Copeland in sections [0044]-[0047] discloses that authentication is performed before a user can access an NFT. Sections [0054] and [0055] of Copeland then disclose that once the access is verified, access to the NFT is provided to the user by streaming the NFT to an NFT access device which may be a smart phone, tablet, or other personal computing device. Therefore Copeland teaches this limitation as written.
The examiner has considered all of the applicant’s arguments but maintains the 103 rejection.
Rejections under 35 § U.S.C. 103
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 of this title, 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-7, 10-12, 14-17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20230241514 A1 (“Dalmia”) and US 20230085677 A1 (“Copeland”) and US 20230162241 A1 (“Saunkeah”) and US 20080215457 A1 (“Pappas”).
Per claims 1 and 11, Dalmia discloses:
receiving, by the processor computer device, from a user device, a purchase request for a non-fungible token… (e.g. A buy action 236 can be executed for a first party to buy an NFT through a gaming channel or from a second party) (Section [0221], [0235], [0250], [0265] and Figs. 3 and 7); Note: the limitation “wherein the non-fungible token is available from a digital shopping site” does not distinguish over the prior art as it is describing where the NFT can be purchased from. It is not positively recited as a step or function of the claims.
transforming, by the processor computer device, information from the purchase request into a point-of-sale scannable barcode, wherein the point-of-sale scannable barcode comprises purchase information on the non-fungible token for purchasing the non-fungible token (e.g. In some embodiments of the present disclosure, the computing system can create a voucher identification code that can include the above-described NFT and voucher identification data and/or embedded data descriptive of the NFT and the voucher. For example, in at least one embodiment, based at least in part on (e.g., in response to) generating the NFT and voucher identification data, the computing system can create the above-described voucher identification code such as, for instance, a barcode, a quick response (QR) code (e.g., an audio QR code, a visual QR code, etc.), an audio code, a visual code, a numeric code, a textual code, an alphanumeric code, and/or another type of code that can include the NFT and voucher identification data and/or embedded data descriptive of the NFT and the voucher.) (Section [0147]). Note: the limitation “wherein the point-of-sale scannable barcode comprises purchase information of the non-fungible token for purchasing the non-fungible token” does not distinguish over the prior art because it is describing the point-of-sale scannable barcode and is not positively recited as a step/function of the claims.
providing, by the processor computer device, the point-of-sale scannable barcode to the user device in response to the purchase request (e.g. In one or more embodiments, the computing system can provide the voucher identification code and/or the voucher to, for instance, the player and/or another entity that can use the voucher identification code in the same or similar manner as described above to implement and/or otherwise utilize the NFT and/or the voucher (e.g., to redeem an asset, product, service, and/or monetary value corresponding to the voucher) (Section [0081] and [0147]).
…wherein the [purchase verification] comprises a redemption request and is subsequent to, and generated in response to, a [point-of-sale scan of the point-of-sale] scannable barcode displayed on the user device at [a retailer point-of-sale] (e.g. For example, in one embodiment, the computing system can receive input data indicative of, for instance, scanned data from a scanner that has been used to scan the voucher identification code (e.g., a QR code) and/or other input data indicative of the player's use of the voucher identification code to redeem the NFT and/or the voucher via an entity located in the metaverse gaming environment, the physical gaming environment, and/or another environment (e.g., another physical environment, computing environment, and/or computer-based gaming environment)) and (e.g. the computing system can record on a blockchain data indicative of the player redeeming the NFT and/or the voucher in the metaverse gaming environment, the physical gaming environment, and/or another environment (e.g., another physical environment, computing environment, and/or computer-based gaming environment). For instance, in one or more embodiments, such data indicative of the player redeeming the NFT and/or the voucher can include and/or constitute data indicative and/or descriptive of a transfer of the player's ownership of the NFT and/or the voucher to an entity that redeemed the NFT and/or voucher) (Section [0097], [0098], [0150], [0151], and [0675]-[0677]. Note: the limitation “wherein the purchase verification comprises a redemption request” does not distinguish over the prior art because it is describing the purchase verification data which does not affect the steps/functions of the claims in a manipulative sense. The positively recited steps/functions of the claims are performed the same way regardless of the description of the purchase verification data.
Further, Dalmia discloses in claim 11, a system comprising a computer device having a processor and executable instructions stored on a non-transitory computer readable medium (e.g. the computing system can include, be coupled to (e.g., communicatively, operatively, etc.), and/or otherwise be associated with one or more processors and/or one or more one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage media that can store instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, can cause the computing system (e.g., via the one or more processors) to perform operations in accordance with one or more example embodiments described herein) (Section [0084]).
Although Dalmia discloses a processor computer device that receives a purchase request for a non-fungible token, generates a scannable barcode based on the purchase request, provides the scannable barcode to a user device, and performs validation in response to a scan of the scannable barcode, Dalmia does not specifically disclose:
…wherein the purchase request comprises an identification of the non-fungible token, user information, delivery information, and whether the non-fungible token is to be purchased immediately or at another time, wherein the non-fungible token is available from a digital shopping site;
receiving, by the processor computer device, a purchase verification for the non-fungible token… a point-of-sale- scan of the point-of-sale… retailer point-of-sale;
providing, by the processor computer device, the non-fungible token to the user device, via delivery pursuant to the delivery information, in response to receiving the purchase verification.
However Copeland, in analogous art of non-fungible tokens, discloses:
…wherein the purchase request comprises an identification of the non-fungible token, user information… and wherein the non-fungible token is available from a digital shopping site (e.g. In another aspect, the access token 108 is optionally configured to retain access control data for an NFT 103. This access control data may include an NFT identifier for uniquely identifying an NFT, and verification data specific to the NFT identifier. The verification data may include transaction information, and/or purchase verification data that is specific to the NFT. This data may include data generated by the NFT marketplace 102 uniquely identifying the NFT 103, the purchase transaction, or both. Other data related to the transaction may be accepted as input such as the date, time, name of the owner, and the like) (Section [0031] and [0048]);
receiving, by the processor computer device, a purchase verification for the non-fungible token… (e.g. the credentials may include purchase verification data specific to the NFT) (Section [0033], [0048], [0044]-[0047], and [0093]);
providing, by the processor computer device, the non-fungible token to the user device… in response to receiving the purchase verification (e.g. When access is verified at 407, access to the NFT is provided to the user, such as via the token reader. The token reader may also include a display device, audio output, or other related equipment for displaying or otherwise experiencing the NFT at 405. In another aspect, once access is verified, the system may be configured to stream the NFT to an NFT access device of the present disclosure whereby a user may experience the NFT. The digital asset related to the NFT may be thus delivered as a stream of bytes passing over a network to the NFT access device) and (e.g. In one example, the NFT access device may be a smart phone, tablet, or other personal computing device) (Section [0044]-[0047], [0054], and [0055]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the NFT redemption system of Dalmia to include the use of purchase verification data to verify the purchase of an NFT before allowing the user access to the NFT via their user device, as taught by Copeland, in order to increase the security of the system and prevent fraud.
Although Dalmia/Copeland discloses a processor computer device that receives a purchase request for a non-fungible token, generates a scannable barcode based on the purchase request, provides the scannable barcode to a user device, and performs validation using purchase verification data in response to a scan of the scannable barcode, Dalmia/Copeland does not specifically disclose:
receive a scan of an intelligent code at a retailer store from a user device, wherein receipt of the scan of the intelligent code allows a user of the user device access to digital shopping site containing a plurality of electronic non-fungible tokens;
…wherein the purchase request comprises… delivery information and whether the non-fungible token is to be purchased immediately or at another time…;
…point-of-sale scan of the point-of-sale scannable barcode displayed on the user device at a retailer point-of-sale;
providing, by the processor computer device, the non-fungible token to a user or a third-party recipient, via delivery pursuant to the delivery information….
However Saunkeah, in analogous art of scannable bar codes, discloses:
receive a scan of an intelligent code at a retailer store from a user device, wherein receipt of the scan of the intelligent code allows a user of the user device access to digital shopping site containing a plurality of electronic non-fungible tokens (e.g. each gift idea presented in the gift advertisement 1102 may include a corresponding QR code that, if scanned using a user device at the point-of-sale, may cause the user device to execute a browser application, through which the user may be directed to and access a standalone website or page provided by the gifting distribution system through which the user may purchase the product and have the product delivered to a recipient as a gift) (Section [0133]). Note: the limitation “wherein the scan of the intelligent code allows a user of the user device access to digital shopping site containing a plurality of electronic non-fungible tokens” does not distinguish over the prior art because it is describing the functions of the user device which is outside the scope of the system of claim 11.
wherein the purchase request comprises… delivery information… (e.g. For example, if the user has selected an option to digitally deliver the gift to the recipient 124, the gift creation engine 302 may prompt the user to provide an electronic address (e.g., e-mail address, etc.) for the recipient 124) (Section [0074] and [0076]);
…point-of-sale scan of the point-of-sale scannable barcode displayed on the user device at a retailer point-of-sale (e.g. each gift idea presented in the gift advertisement may include a corresponding QR code that, if scanned using a user device at the point-of-sale) (Section [0133]);
providing, by the processor computer device, the non-fungible token to a user or a third-party recipient, via delivery pursuant to the delivery information… (e.g. For example, if the user has selected an option to digitally deliver the gift to the recipient 124, the gift delivery engine 304 may transmit an electronic message that includes one or more redemption options (e.g., electronic gift card, link to a web site associated with a retailer or the gifting distribution system 102, etc.) for the gift to an electronic address (e.g., e-mail address, etc.) associated with the recipient 124) (Section [0074] and [0076]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the NFT purchase system of Dalmia/Copeland to include the use of a barcode scan to access a website to purchase NFT and delivery information, as taught by Saunkeah, in order to provide convenience to customers. By allowing customers to scan a barcode to access a purchase website, the user does not have to manually enter a website address. Further, by including information that informs the system where to deliver the purchased item, it allows the purchaser to send the purchased item to a recipient without having to manually send the item to the recipient. Furthermore, since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself that is in the substitution of the point-of-sale bar code scanner of Saunkeah for the bar code scanner of Dalmia. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
Although Dalmia/Copeland/Saunkeah disclose receiving a purchase request for a non-fungible token, wherein the purchase request comprise an identification of the non-fungible token, user information, and delivery information, Dalmia/Copeland/Saunkeah do not specifically disclose:
wherein the purchase request comprises… whether the non-fungible token is to be purchased immediately or at another time….
However Pappas, in analogous art of purchasing of goods and services, discloses:
wherein the purchase request comprises… whether the non-fungible token is to be purchased immediately or at another time… (e.g. A list of purchase prices for the goods or services is typically provided along with the list of electronic options. This allows a purchaser to either directly purchase desired goods or services or potentially defer a purchase to a desired time in the future by purchasing an electronic option on desired goods or services) (Section [0052], [0073], and Fig. 4A). Note: the limitation “wherein the purchase request comprises… whether the non-fungible token is to be purchased immediately or at another time” does not distinguish over the prior art because it is describing the data within the purchase request which does not affect the steps/functions of the claim in a manipulative sense.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the purchase request data of Dalmia/Copeland/Saunkeah to include whether the NFT is to be purchased immediately or at another time, as taught by Pappas, in order to achieve the predictable result of providing convenience to the customer by allowing them to lock in a good purchase price even though they may not have the current funds to make the purchase right away.
Per claims 2 and 12, Dalmia/Copeland/Saunkeah/Pappas discloses all of the limitations of claims 1 and 11 above. Dalmia further discloses:
wherein the digital shopping site comprises a plurality of non-fungible token from a plurality of retailers (e.g. an NFT portal (also referred to as NFT marketplace) that enables users to purchase NFTs that may have a limited supply. The NFTs may be actioned by or for a user within one or more gaming channels of the gaming system) (Section [0059], [0265] and Fig. 7); Note: the limitation “wherein the digital shopping site comprises a plurality of non-fungible token from a plurality of retailers” does not distinguish over the prior art as it is describing the digital shopping website. It is not positively recited as a step or function of the claims.
Per claim 3, Dalmia/Copeland/Saunkeah/Pappas discloses all of the limitations of claim 2 above. Copeland further discloses:
further comprising validating the purchase request of the non-fungible token from a plurality of retailers (e.g. access control system is configured to compare the purchase data with the transactional data; and wherein the access control system is configured to deny access to the NFT when the purchase data does not match the transactional data for the NFT specified by the NFT identifier) (Section [0033], [0048], and [0093]).
The motivation to combine Copeland with Dalmia/Saunkeah/Pappas is disclosed above with reference to claims 1 and 11.
Per claims 4 and 19, Dalmia/Copeland/Saunkeah/Pappas discloses all of the limitations of claims 3 and 11 above. Dalmia further discloses:
Wherein validation comprises providing a code to the user device that is provided to the processor computer device and determining the code is valid (e.g. In another example embodiment, based at least in part (e.g., in response to) receipt of such input data indicative of the player using the identification code in the gaming environment to perform such one or more operations associated with the NFT, the computing system can: validate the identification code against the identification data and/or the above-described embedded data descriptive of the player and the NFT; and perform and/or facilitate performing such one or more operations (e.g., one or more of the above-described operations) based at least in part on (e.g., in response to) validation of the identification code by the computing system.) (Section [0099]).
Per claims 5 and 14, Dalmia/Copeland/Saunkeah/Pappas discloses all of the limitations of claims 1 and 11 above. Saunkeah further discloses:
wherein the purchase request is received from the user that has accessed the digital shopping site by scanning an intelligent code with the user device (e.g. the gift advertisement 1102 may include a corresponding QR code that, if scanned using a user device at the point-of-sale, may cause the user device to execute a browser application, through which the user may be directed to and access a standalone website or page provided by the gifting distribution system through which the user may purchase the product and have the product delivered to a recipient as a gift) (Section [0133]).
The motivation to combine Saunkeah with Dalmia/Copeland/Pappas is disclosed above with reference to claims 1 and 11.
Per claims 6 and 15, Dalmia/Copeland/Saunkeah/Pappas discloses all of the limitations of claims 5 and 14 above. Saunkeah further discloses:
wherein the intelligent code comprises at least one of a barcode; a QR code; an arrangement of numerals, letters, symbols, images, and/or colors; an electromagnetic signal (e.g., nearfield communication (“NFC”), infrared, radio frequency identification (“RFID”)); a mechanical wave (e.g., sound); or combinations thereof (e.g. a corresponding QR code) (Section [0133]).
The motivation to combine Saunkeah with Dalmia/Copeland/Pappas is disclosed above with reference to claims 1 and 11.
Per claim 7, Dalmia/Copeland/Saunkeah/Pappas discloses all of the limitations of claim 5 above. Saunkeah further discloses:
wherein the intelligent code is located at a retailer store which comprises the retailer point of sale (e.g. a scanned using a user device at the point-of-sale) (Section [0133]).
The motivation to combine Saunkeah with Dalmia/Copeland/Pappas is disclosed above with reference to claims 1 and 11.
Per claims 10 and 17, Dalmia/Copeland/Saunkeah/Pappas discloses all of the limitations of claims 1 and 11 above. Dalmia further discloses:
wherein the point-of-sale scannable barcode is unique to the non-fungible token (e.g. In some embodiments, the computing system can codify and/or manifest such an association of the player with the NFT in the form of, for example, an identification code (e.g., a quick response (QR) code) that can include data (e.g., encrypted data) that is descriptive of the association between the player and the NFT) (Section [0082]).
Per claim 16, Dalmia/Copeland/Saunkeah/Pappas discloses all of the limitations of claim 14 above. Saunkeah further discloses:
Wherein the intelligent code is on an endcap, a physical card, a card package, a chit, or combinations thereof (e.g. in the environment 1100, a retailer may present, at a point-of-sale (e.g., store, kiosk, office, etc.) a gift advertisement 1102 generated by a gifting distribution system. In an embodiment, the gifting distribution system can augment the gift advertisement 1102 to provide a code for each offered product. The code may be implemented as a Quick Response (QR) code, a barcode, or other machine-readable label that may encode information that may be scanned and processed by a user device (e.g., smartphone, etc.)) (Section [0131] and [0133]).
The motivation to combine Saunkeah with Dalmia/Copeland/Pappas is disclosed above with reference to claims 1 and 11.
Claims 8 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Dalmia/Copeland/Saunkeah/Pappas, as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, in further view of US 20230066272 A1 (“Patel”).
Per claims 8 and 18, Dalmia/Copeland/Saunkeah/Pappas do not specifically disclose wherein the non-fungible token is delivered digitally to an email or text number provided by the user. However Patel, in analogous art of non-fungible tokens discloses:
wherein the non-fungible token is delivered digitally to an email or text number provided by the user (e.g. In some examples, tokens may be shared in a variety of suitable formats, including, for example, dynamic webpage links, alphanumeric identifiers, images, videos, non-fungible tokens (NFTs), QR codes, and one or more augmented reality (AR) virtual reality (VR) objects, or extended reality (XR) objects or other instances, and may further be shared along any communication media including multimedia messaging, email, social media posting, social media ephemeral content, AR/VR/XR object interactions, and so forth. (Section [0038]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the non-fungible token transaction system of Dalmia/Copeland/Saunkeah/Pappas to include the use of email or multimedia messaging to deliver the NFTs, as taught by Patel, in order to provide a more convenient way for the user to receive the NFT that they purchased.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY SAX whose telephone number is 571-272-2935. The Examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8-4:30. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s supervisor, Patrick McAtee can be reached at (571) 272-7575.
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.
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.
/TPS/
Examiner, Art Unit 3698
/PATRICK MCATEE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3698
Prosecution Insights