DETAILED ACTION
Acknowledgements
The amendment filed on 05/26/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-8 and 13-14 are pending.
Claims 1-8 and 13-14 have been examined.
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 .
Response to Amendment/Arguments
Claims 1-3, 5-6 and 13-14 are amended.
Regarding applicant’s arguments on Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. §101, the arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
It is the applicant’s position that the claim 1 is not directed to an abstract idea because it “recites a particular system and digital exchange for digital tokens, which includes data objects, fractional tokens, whole tokens, a portfolio table, and a transaction table, all of which are stored in memory and accessed via a processor.” The examiner respectfully disagrees.
The claim(s) recite(s) processing exchange transaction. Specifically, the claims recite “storing, in at least one [system memory storage device], at least a first and second data object, each data object including at least one object identifier and an initial value associated with a value attribute; creating at least a first and second group of fractional tokens each associated with the at least a first and second data object; assigning each fractional token a value and a unique identifier and a key associating the fractional token with its respective first or second data object, wherein a sum of the value of each fractional token of a group is equal to its respective object value, each fractional token of a group being linked to another fractional token of the same group via cryptographic hashes; creating at least one whole token, the at least one whole token comprising one of the first and second group of fractional tokens and being a portion or all of the data object value of the respective group of fractional tokens; and transferring one of a whole token and fractional token from one portfolio table to another portfolio table and recording this with a transaction table including a first user identifier portion, a second user identifier portion, a data object identifier portion, a whole token portion, and a fractional token portion, and further recording this transfer with a chain of a plurality of whole token and fractional token transfers linked via [cryptographic hash] on one of a [public and private ledger].”, which is “commercial or legal interactions” within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” and “mental processes” grouping of abstract ideas in prong one of step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test (See MPEP 2106) because the claims involve a series of steps for processing exchange transaction. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
The applicant argues that “No part of the recited method is performed in the human mind or directed to a commercial practice. This is a purely technically implemented method. Likewise, the automated creation of a whole token to manage token state, storage and location cannot be performed in the human mind. Rather, these limitations define a specific implementation of managing digital assets and maintaining data integrity.” The examiner respectfully disagrees.
As analysis performed above, claim 1 limitations “storing... at least a first and second data object, each data object including at least one object identifier and an initial value associated with a value attribute; creating at least a first and second group of fractional tokens each associated with the at least a first and second data object; assigning each fractional token a value and a unique identifier and a key associating the fractional token with its respective first or second data object, wherein a sum of the value of each fractional token of a group is equal to its respective object value, each fractional token of a group being linked to another fractional token of the same group via cryptographic hashes; creating at least one whole token, the at least one whole token comprising one of the first and second group of fractional tokens and being a portion or all of the data object value of the respective group of fractional tokens;” can be performed by pen and paper which is “mental processes”. “transferring one of a whole token and fractional token from one portfolio table to another portfolio table and recording this with a transaction table including a first user identifier portion, a second user identifier portion, a data object identifier portion, a whole token portion, and a fractional token portion, and further recording this transfer with a chain of a plurality of whole token and fractional token transfers linked via ...on one of a...” is commercial or legal integrations within “certain methods of organizing human activity”.
The applicant further argues that “Even if claim 1 were directed to an abstract idea, the claim as a whole integrates any such concept into a practical application.” because “the elements of the claim recite a specific improvement over prior systems by automatically creating a whole token based on a threshold of previously created fractional tokens, tracking token transfers in real time across multiple objects and users, and synchronizing updates of the portfolio and the transaction tables to maintain integrity and consistency.” The examiner respectfully disagrees.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because, when analyzed under prong two of step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test (See MPEP 2106), the additional element(s) of the claim(s) such as the use of system memory storage device, cryptographic hashes, system processor, public and private ledger merely use(s) a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. The processors and memories are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function of exchange transaction) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer components. Accordingly, the additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and the claims are directed to an abstract idea.
Using a generic computer to automating token creation processes does not involve improvements to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field (MPEP 2106.05(a)). Therefore, the additional elements of the claims do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
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 1-8 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Analysis
In the instant case, claims 1-8 are directed to a system, claim 13 is directed to a method, and claim 14 is directed to an apparatus. Therefore, these claims fall within the four statutory categories of invention.
The claim(s) recite(s) processing exchange transaction. Specifically, the claims recite “storing, in at least one [system memory storage device], at least a first and second data object, each data object including at least one object identifier and an initial value associated with a value attribute; creating at least a first and second group of fractional tokens each associated with the at least a first and second data object; assigning each fractional token a value and a unique identifier and a key associating the fractional token with its respective first or second data object, wherein a sum of the value of each fractional token of a group is equal to its respective object value, each fractional token of a group being linked to another fractional token of the same group via cryptographic hashes; creating at least one whole token, the at least one whole token comprising one of the first and second group of fractional tokens and being a portion or all of the data object value of the respective group of fractional tokens; and transferring one of a whole token and fractional token from one portfolio table to another portfolio table and recording this with a transaction table including a first user identifier portion, a second user identifier portion, a data object identifier portion, a whole token portion, and a fractional token portion, and further recording this transfer with a chain of a plurality of whole token and fractional token transfers linked via [cryptographic hash] on one of a [public and private ledger].”, which is “commercial or legal interactions” within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” and “mental processes” grouping of abstract ideas in prong one of step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test (See MPEP 2106) because the claims involve a series of steps for processing exchange transaction. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because, when analyzed under prong two of step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test (See MPEP 2106), the additional element(s) of the claim(s) such as the use of system memory storage device, cryptographic hashes, system processor, public and private ledger merely use(s) a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. The processors and memories are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function of exchange transaction) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer components. Accordingly, the additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and the claims are directed to an abstract idea.
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using system memory storage device, cryptographic hashes, system processor, public and private ledger steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer components cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible.
Dependent claim 2 describes object identifier. Dependent claims 3-4 describe first and second data object attributes. Dependent claims 5-6 describes first and second data object value. Dependent claim 7 describes fractional tokens. Dependent claim 8 describe recordation of exchange transaction. These claims further recite the abstract idea of certain methods of organizing human activity and mental processes. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional element(s) of the claim(s) such as the use of system memory storage device, cryptographic hashes, system processor, public and private ledger merely use(s) a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claims are not patent eligible.
Viewed as a whole, the combination of elements recited in the claims simply recite the concept of processing exchange transaction of right of publicity. The claims do not, for example, purport to improve the functioning of the computer itself. Nor do they effect an improvement in any other technology or technical field.
The use of a system memory storage device, cryptographic hashes, system processor, public and private ledger as tools to implement the abstract idea does not render the claim patent eligible because it does not provide meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment and requires no more than a computer performing functions that correspond to acts required to carry out the abstract idea.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-8 and 13-14 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 101 set forth in this Office action. The closest prior art of record is US20220076256A1 (“Anderson”). Anderson discloses a system and digital exchange for managing digital tokens, (Fig. 2) comprising: (a) at least one system processing unit connected with at least one system memory storage device; (¶0007) (b) at least a first and second data object stored in the at least one system memory storage device, each data object including at least one object identifier, the at least first and second data objects having an initial value attribute; (¶¶0024-26) (c) at least a first and second group of fractional token each associated with the at least a first and second data object, each fractional token containing a value and a unique identifier and a key associating the fractional token with its respective first or second data object, wherein a sum of the value of each fractional token of a group is equal to its respective data object value, each fractional token of a group being linked to another fractional token of the same group via cryptographic hashes; (¶¶0027-33) (d) at least one whole token comprising one of the first and second group of fractional tokens, wherein a whole token represents a portion or all of the data object value of the respective group of fractional tokens, the whole token being created by a user of the system and exchange when the user owns a threshold amount of fractional tokens of a group of fractional tokens. (¶¶0031-33) (f) wherein the at least one system processing unit changes the location a whole token or a fractional token from the at least one portfolio table to a second portfolio table and records this change with the transaction table, including the first user identifier, an identifier of the second user, at least one of the first and second data object identifiers, and one of a whole token or fractional token , the change of location recorded with the transaction table being recorded with a chain of recorded transactions linked via cryptographic hash on one of a public and private ledger. (¶¶0033-36). However, the prior art does not teach, (e) at least one portfolio table stored with the at least one system memory storage device and configured to include each of a user identifier, data object identifiers, whole tokens and fractional tokens, the portfolio table including at least a first user identifier, the first and second data object identifiers, the at least one whole token, and at least one fractional token from the at least a first and second group of fractional tokens, wherein the at least one system processing unit is configured to update the portfolio table to record at least one fractional or whole token; and (f) a transaction table stored with the at least one system memory storage device and configured to record a change in location of a whole token and fractional token, the transaction table including a first user identifier portion, a second user identifier potion, a data object identifier portion, a whole token portion, and a fractional token portion.
Conclusion
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US20210133735A1 (“Maim”) discloses Token-based transactional systems and methods. It proposes a network transactional system, comprising a set of token nodes (TN), a set of user nodes (UN) and a set of provider nodes (PN), the nodes being capable of executing an executable contract for a user node to obtain token account units (Voucher Tokens) by reserving (R) reserve account units according to a value of the token units which itself varies according to the reserve, the number of token units in circulation and the reserve ratio (RR). A provider node is associated with each token node and the token is representative of a product or asset (good, service, right or other benefit) of the provider, or a group of such products or assets.
US20220222657A1(“Nichani”) discloses a method and system for managing life cycle of a tokenized real asset in a Blockchain-based ecosystem. The asset tokens of the real asset are put up for sale on a token issuance platform and the proceeds from the sale are distributed to the asset owner, etc. The listing of asset tokens in the Blockchain-based ecosystem requires project consensus which involves participation of key stakeholders who own utility tokens to participate in the community decision making. The asset tokens are then subjected to trading and maintenance which includes maintaining money flow corresponding to the real asset, selling the asset tokens by the asset token holders via an asset token exchange, and settlement of rewards to asset token holders via a settlement engine. Upon the end-of-term of the real asset, the asset tokens are terminated, and exit is enabled from the Blockchain-based ecosystem.
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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YINGYING ZHOU whose telephone number is (571)272-5308. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:00am - 5:00pm ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, John W Hayes can be reached on 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.
/YINGYING ZHOU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3697
Prosecution Insights