Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/163,158

SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PREDICTING CRYPTOGRAPHIC ASSET DISTRIBUTIONS

Final Rejection §101§112
Filed
Feb 01, 2023
Examiner
KANG, IRENE S
Art Unit
3696
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Coinbase Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
16%
Grant Probability
At Risk
3-4
OA Rounds
6y 1m
To Grant
42%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 16% of cases
16%
Career Allow Rate
37 granted / 224 resolved
-35.5% vs TC avg
Strong +26% interview lift
Without
With
+26.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
6y 1m
Avg Prosecution
16 currently pending
Career history
240
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
35.5%
-4.5% vs TC avg
§103
33.4%
-6.6% vs TC avg
§102
15.9%
-24.1% vs TC avg
§112
11.7%
-28.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 224 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §112
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 . DETAILED ACTION The following is a Non-Final Office Action in response to communications received February 1, 2023. Claims 1-20 are pending and examined. Response to Amendments and Arguments As to the rejection of Claims 2-20 under 35 U.S.C. § 101, Applicant’s arguments and amendments are moot as these claims have been cancelled. As to the rejection of Claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. § 101, Applicant’s amendments have been fully considered but are not persuasive and the rejection is thereby maintained as detailed below. As to the rejection of Claims 2-20 under 35 U.S.C. § 103, Applicant’s arguments and amendments are moot as these claims have been cancelled. As to the rejection of Claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. § 103, Applicant’s arguments and amendments have been fully considered and are persuasive. This rejection has thereby been withdrawn. 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, 24, and 32 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. The term “increasing consensus robustness” in claims 1, 24, and 32 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “increasing consensus robustness” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. 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, and 21-39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. (Step 1) The claims recite a system, method, and product. For the purposes of this analysis, representative claim 1 is addressed. (Step 2A, prong 1) Abstract ideas are in bold below, and represents a mental process, as a method of validating identification information when opening an account. Validating user identification information in order to open an account is akin to a mental process. A system for facilitating increase of aggregate staking to improve blockchain resilience of a blockchain network against malicious validations from consensus attacks by predicting cryptographic asset distributions for a future period of time using one or more artificial intelligence models, the system comprising: one or more processors[[;]] and one or more non-transitory media in connection with receiving time-series data over a past period of time corresponding to a stakeable cryptographic asset on a blockchain having a proof-of-stake consensus mechanism, ; inputting a representation of the time-series data into a machine learning model to obtain a prediction of the cryptographic asset distributions for the future period of time wherein a cryptographic asset distribution occurs in response to a respective cryptographic asset being used to secure a respective blockchain; inputting user characteristic data, indicating one or more characteristics about a user with one or more cryptographic assets, and; into a recommendation model to generate a staking recommendation, related to consensus validation of blockchain operations on the blockchain using the stakeable cryptographic asset, to increase consensus robustness of the blockchain; and causing, on a user interface, display of the staking recommendation to increase consensus robustness of the stakeable cryptographic asset. (Step 2A prong 2) The additional elements are considered as follows: “one or more artificial intelligence models, the system comprising: one or more processors; and one or more non-transitory media it” this sever is claimed at a high level of generality, it receives the information, performs the abstract idea, and outputs the results. “inputting a representation of the time-series data into a machine learning model to obtain” This is merely “apply it” this sever is claimed at a high level of generality, it receives the information, performs the abstract idea, and outputs the results. “receiving time-series data” This is also an extra solution activity, akin to data gathering. “causing, on a user interface, display of the staking recommendation to increase consensus robustness of the stakeable cryptographic asset” This is also an extra solution activity, akin to data gathering. (Step 2B) The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration into a practical application, the additional elements amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the abstract idea of using generic computer components. The claim elements when considered separately and in an ordered combination, do not add significantly more than implementing the abstract idea of validating user identification information in order to open an account, over a generic computer network with generic computing elements, and generic hardware. Independent claims 24 and 32 are rejected under the same reasoning as claim 1. Analysis of dependent claims 25-31, and 33-39, recited additional details which only further narrow the abstract idea and do not add any additional features, alone or in combination, that would provide a practical application or provide significantly more. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to IRENE S KANG whose telephone number is (571)270-3611. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday between M-F 10am-2pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Matt Gart may be reached at (571)-272-3955. 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. /IRENE KANG/ Examiner, Art Unit 3695 3/5/2026 /MATTHEW S GART/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3696
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 01, 2023
Application Filed
Jun 01, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §112
Oct 07, 2025
Interview Requested
Nov 03, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Nov 04, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 05, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 05, 2026
Final Rejection — §101, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12586131
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR COVARIANCE MATRIX ESTIMATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12555162
EVENT TRIGGERED TRADING
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12469018
SPLIT ATM BOOTH AND METHOD OF PERFORMING BANKING TRANSACTIONS THEREIN
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 11, 2025
Patent 12423701
TRANSACTION PROCESSING SYSTEM AND TRANSACTION PROCESSING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Sep 23, 2025
Patent 12288203
Systems and Methods for an Electronic Wallet Payment Tool
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 29, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
16%
Grant Probability
42%
With Interview (+26.0%)
6y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 224 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month