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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 November 12, 2025, has been entered.
Status of Claims
This communication is responsive to the submission filed November 12, 2025.
Claims 1 and 5 are amended.
Claims 18-27 are canceled.
Claims 1-17 are pending.
Response to Remarks
35 U.S.C. § 101
Applicant contends that the claims are directed towards patent eligible subject matter. First, Applicant contends that the claims do not fall into any of the categories of abstract ideas, i.e., a Mathematical Concept, a Mental Process, or Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activities. Specifically, Applicant contends that the amended language directed towards storing, for each of the sales orders of the products from the users, a corresponding smart contract in a decentralized ledger and executing a transaction providing a user-specific reward using a corresponding smart contract do not fall into any of the subgroupings of Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activities. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Storing sales orders as a contract in a ledger and then executing a transaction providing a user-specific reward using a corresponding contract are examples of commercial activities because transaction data, i.e., a contract, is stored in a ledger and used to execute another commercial transaction, i.e., providing a user-specific reward. While a smart contract is an additional element, the smart contract serves to implement the above-identified abstract ideas. In other words, this additional element amounts to an instruction to apply the abstract ideas using a computer. Therefore, the amended subject matter fails to recite a practical application of the abstract ideas. Therefore, Applicant’s contention is unpersuasive.
Applicant next contends that the additional elements recite an improvement to computer capabilities or an existing technology. Examiner respectfully disagrees. It is important to keep in mind that an improvement in the abstract idea itself (e.g. a recited fundamental economic concept) is not an improvement in technology. See MPEP 2106.05(a)(II). The improvements Applicant contends recite a practical application appear to be improvements to abstract ideas rather than to computers or an existing technology. For example, Applicant’s remarks regarding that the system creates wealth through a fivefold growth model which can be enjoyed by awarded to users/consumers and share the benefits with charities appears to recite improvements directed towards Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activities rather than an improvement to a computer or other technical field. Further, Applicant’s contention that the system generally uses blockchain to improve the process is also unpersuasive because the improvement is to the abstract idea rather than to the improvement of blockchain technology or another technical field. Moreover, the contention that the claimed invention redistributes wealth and creates additional wealth is an improvement directed towards Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activities rather than a computer or another existing technology. Therefore, Applicant’s contention is unpersuasive.
Applicant also contends that the amended claim language, which recite additional elements, recite significantly more than the abstract ideas. Examiner respectfully disagrees because, as noted above, the amended claim language recites abstract ideas rather than additional elements. Further, the improvements appear to be directed towards abstract ideas, e.g., Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activities, rather than improvements to a computer or another technical field. Therefore, Applicant’s contention that the claims recite significantly more than the abstract idea is unpersuasive.
Accordingly, this ground of rejection is 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 1-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to abstract ideas without significantly more. There are two criteria for subject matter eligibility. The first is that the claimed invention must be to one of the four statutory categories, i.e., a process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. See MPEP 2106(I). Second, the claimed invention also must qualify as patent-eligible subject matter, i.e., the claim must not be directed to a judicial exception unless the claim as a whole includes additional limitations amounting to significantly more than the exception. See MPEP 2106(I). Here, claims 1-17 are directed towards a process. Therefore, the analysis proceeds to determine whether the claims recite abstract ideas.
Per Claim 1: Claim 1, as a whole, is directed towards the abstract idea of processing a transaction, allocating tokens based on the transaction, drawing winning tickets based on the tokens, and executing a reward transaction for the winning tickets. In particular, the claim recites registering users to use a platform and processing sales orders of a product from users. The claim stores, for each of the sales orders, a corresponding contract in a ledger. The method then qualifies the users to determine the eligibility of each user for receiving a reward. The process calculates a number of the product to be delivered in a period of time based on the sales orders. The claim then allocates a plurality of non-fungible tokens where each non-fungible token represents stock ownership of a production entity. The claim divides the plurality of non-fungible tokens into two sets N1 and N2 and allocates the N1 non-fungible tokens into a purchase wallet and the N2 non-fungible tokens into a rewards pool wallet. Upon receiving the number of product from the production entity, the method allocates a number of redeemable token to a user based on the number of product purchased by the user. The claim receives a request from the qualified user to redeem the user-specific number of the redeemable tokens. In response to the request, the process performs delivery of the user-specific number of the product to the qualified user in a predetermined period of time. The process allocates a drawing ticket to a user based on the user having a predetermined number of redeemable tokens. After delivery of the product begins, the claim draws rewards in a rewards pool to determine users who have a winning ticket. The claim then executes a transaction providing a user-specific reward to a corresponding user wallet. The reward has the benefits of stock shares corresponding to the production entity. In other words, the claim recites Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activities recognized as reciting abstract ideas. More specifically, the following underlined claim elements recite abstract ideas while the non-underlined claim elements recite additional elements according to MPEP 2106.04(a).
allocating on the blockchain platform with respect to the Production Entity, purchase logic including one or more processor-executable instructions, which when executed by at least one node in the blockchain platform, cause the node to:
register users to the blockchain platform;
process sales orders of the product from the users, and store, for each of the sales orders of the product from the users, a corresponding smart contract in a decentralized ledger;
qualify the users to determine the eligibility of each user for receiving a user-specific reward;
calculate a number P of the product to be delivered in a predetermined period of time based on the sales orders from the users; and
provide the number P of the product to a Fintech Entity;
allocating on the blockchain platform with respect to the Fintech Entity, rewards logic including one or more processor-executable instructions, which when executed by at least one node in the blockchain platform cause the node to:
allocate a plurality of non-fungible tokens (NFTs) in total number N, each non-fungible token representing a percentage of stock ownership of the Production Entity;
divide the plurality of non-fungible tokens into a first number N1 of NFTs and a second number N2 of NFTs;
allocate, on the blockchain platform, the first number N1 of NFTs into a purchase base wallet and the second number N2 of NFTs into a rewards pool wallet, respectively, and
upon receiving the number P of the product from the Production Entity, allocate a number of redeemable tokens corresponding to the number P of the product;
allocating a user-specific number of redeemable tokens to a qualified user based on the number of the product purchased by the qualified user;
receiving a request from the qualified user to redeem the user-specific number of the redeemable tokens;
in response to the request, performing delivery of the user-specific number of the product to the qualified user in the predetermined period of time;
allocating a drawing ticket to a user upon a predetermined number of the redeemable tokens;
once the delivery of the product begins, drawing rewards in a rewards pool to determine users who have winning drawing tickets, according to reward rules; and
executing a transaction on the blockchain platform providing a user-specific reward to a corresponding user wallet using a corresponding smart contract for each of the users who have winning drawing tickets, wherein at least one of the rewards has the benefits of stock shares corresponding to the ownership of the Production Entity.
Because the claim recites abstract ideas, the analysis proceeds to determine whether the claim recites additional elements that recite a practical application of the abstract ideas. According to MPEP 2106.04(d), additional elements that recite an instruction to apply the abstract ideas using a computer, that recite insignificant extra-solution activities, or that generally link the use of the abstract ideas to a particular technological environment or field of use are not indicative of a practical application. Here, the additional elements of allocating purchase logic on the blockchain platform, allocating rewards logic on the blockchain platform, the blockchain platform, and smart contract are tools used to implement the abstract ideas. In other words, the additional elements, when considered individually and in combination, recite an instruction to apply the abstract ideas using computers. Therefore, the claim as a whole fails to recite a practical application of the abstract ideas.
The analysis then proceeds to determine whether the additional elements, when considered individually and in combination, recite significantly more than the abstract ideas. According to MPEP 2106.05, additional elements that recite an instructions to apply the abstract ideas using a computer, that recite insignificant extra-solution activities, that generally link the use of the abstract ideas to a particular technological environment or field of use, or that recite well-understood, routine, and conventional activities are not indicative of reciting significantly more than the abstract ideas. Claim elements previously considered to recite insignificant extra-solution activities are reevaluated at this step to determine whether they recite well-understood, routine, and conventional activities. Such findings must be supported by the evidentiary requirements set forth in the Berkheimer Memo. Here, as noted above, the additional elements of allocating purchase logic on the blockchain platform, allocating rewards logic on the blockchain platform, the blockchain platform, and smart contract are tools used to implement the abstract ideas. In other words, the additional elements, when considered individually and in combination, recite an instruction to apply the abstract ideas using computers. Therefore, the additional claim elements, when considered individually and in combination, fail to recite significantly more than the abstract ideas.
Accordingly, claim 1 is rejected as being directed towards patent ineligible subject matter.
Per Claims 2-17: Claims 2-17 have also been analyzed for subject matter eligibility. However, these claims fail to recite patent eligible subject matter for the following reasons:
Claim 2 recites the additional element of allocating asset management logic on the blockchain platform. However, it fails to recite a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea as it is an instruction to apply the abstract ideas using a computer.
Claim 3 recites the additional element of allocating asset management logic on the blockchain platform. However, it fails to recite a practical application or significantly more than the abstract ideas as it is an instruction to apply the abstract ideas using a computer.
Claim 4 recites the abstract idea of allowing a user to open an account and requesting user information to keep the account in good standing, which is a Certain Method of Organizing Human Activities.
Claim 5 recites the abstract idea of allowing a user to put in a purchase order for a specific amount of product, completing through transaction through the platform, and issuing a receipt for the transaction, which are Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activities.
Claim 6 recites the abstract idea of comparing the number of products purchased by a user to a threshold to determine whether the user is qualified to receive a reward, which is a Certain Method of Organizing Human Activities and a Mental Process.
Claim 7 recites that the product is bottled water. This fails to recite a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea as it generally links the use of the abstract idea to a particular use.
Claim 8 recites the abstract idea of allocating a user-specific number of redeemable tokens to a user equals the number of product purchased by the user, which is a Certain Method of Organizing Human Activities.
Claim 9 recites the abstract idea of dividing the number of redeemable tokens by a predetermined number to generate an integer I, comparing the integer I to a predetermined limit integer M, allocating I drawing tickets to the user if I is less than or equal to M, and allocating M drawing tickets if I is greater than M, which recites Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activities, Mental Process, and Mathematical Concepts.
Claim 10 recites the abstract idea of collected redeemed tokens and destroying them, which is a Certain Method of Organizing Human Activities.
Claim 11 recites the abstract idea that the reward rules are predetermined or voted on, which is a Certain Method of Organizing Human Activities.
Claim 12 recites the abstract idea that the drawing is conducted periodically, which is a Certain Method of Organizing Human Activities.
Claim 13 recites the abstract idea that N1 + N2 = N and N1 is less than N2, which is a Mathematical Concept and a Mental Process.
Claim 14 recites the abstract idea of auctioning N1 of the NFTs, depositing proceeds of the auction to a wallet, and storing each NFT auctioned, which is a Certain Method of Organizing Human Activities.
Claim 15 recites the abstract idea of issuing convertible preference shares to investing entities, receiving cash by the production entity from the investing entities, aggregating all the cash, calculating an after-tax earning that the investing entities would make from the cash, aggregating all cash in a second amount, making book entries for all cash payments, calculating a maximum number, and making book entries when the number of ordinary shares is delivered to the investing entities, which is a Certain Method of Organizing Human Activities and Mathematical Concepts.
Claim 16 recites the abstract idea of allocating a plurality of second class non-fungible tokens, each representing stock ownership of the production entity and allocating a number of second class of non-fungible tokens to an investing entity, which is a Certain Method of Organizing Human Activities.
Claim 17 recites the additional element of the platform including a plurality of nodes configured to execute purchase and rewards logic. These additional elements fail to recite a practical application or significantly more than the abstract ideas as they are instruction to apply the abstract ideas using computers.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2017/0243193 discloses a hybrid of blockchain with other information management systems to provide validation for documents, transaction state and performance against contracts. A blockchain document hybrid allows portions of versioned documents to be shared without revealing full document content. For transaction and contract state a confidential Shared Data Structure (SDS) is combined with a publicly viewable blockchain to record the terms of a trade transaction, starting from as early as a purchase order. Out of these building blocks we present designs for commerce systems that can automatically execute the flow of money based upon signals resulting from the flow of goods. Besides reducing processing costs through automation, these designs open up avenues for innovations such as a Data LC, Blockchain Based Obligation (BBO), Deep Tier Financing, and Cash Flow Scrips.
U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2019/0080406 discloses a method includes creating a seller escrow wallet. The seller escrow wallet only displays a content of the wallet, is non-custodial, maintains an ability to return tokens stored within the wallet to an original account via a request, transfers tokens purchased by the seller to the wallet, and utilizes a master wallet to facilitate a transfer of the tokens from the seller wallet to a buyer wallet associated with the buyer. Upon a sale of the tokens, the method includes moving the tokens from the seller wallet to the master wallet using addresses that identify at least one of the seller and the buyer, receiving a payment at the master wallet from the buyer for the tokens and upon receiving the payment at the master wallet, releasing the tokens to the buyer and transferring the payment to the seller.
U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2022/0084015 discloses methods and systems for a cause-based eco-system that includes a platform supporting cryptocurrency transactions between users and organizations, the embedding of ethical constraints in the cryptocurrency as part of the transactions, and a marketplace to facilitate and manage the transactions. The eco-system also includes a lending and investment marketplace platform that allows users to invest in ethically or socially conscious organizations, and to borrow/lend against those investments.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NILESH B KHATRI whose telephone number is (571)270-7083. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 AM - 5:30 PM Monday-Friday, alternating Fridays off.
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, Neha Patel can be reached at (571) 270-1492. 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.
/NILESH B KHATRI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3699