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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 4-6, 10, 13-15, 20-21 and 23-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yantis et al. (US PG pub 2022/0067710).
Yantis et al. shows,
In regards to claims 1 and 10,
A gaming engine smart contract system, comprising:
an execution framework; (Figure 1, platform 100)
a gaming engine programmed with the execution framework and including:
a software development environment; (paragraph [0856], “In embodiments, the platform 100 may implement a micro services architecture such that services may be accessed by clients, such as by APIs and/or software development kits (SDKs).”) and
an architecture that provides a set of gaming engine services with predefined tools game engine generated environments; (The software development kits (SDKs) from above are the predefined tools for digital content developers. Paragraph [0743], show digital token services, which are considered to be a set of gaming engine services.)
a smart contract system programmed with the execution framework and smart contract services associated with transactions that are based on electronically verifiable conditions; and (paragraph [0693], “ownership of the digital token to the user seeking the loan, receiving, by the processing system, an agreement to lend a defined amount of funds to the user by a lender using the collateralization item as collateral, generating, by the processing system, an instance of a smart contract governing the loan, the instance of the smart contract indicating an amount to be paid back by the user to the lender and one or more conditions that cause ownership of the digital token to be transferred to the lender, and deploying, by the processing system, the instance of the smart contract.” This is a smart contract service associated with transactions. Paragraph [0697], “the instance of the smart contract is deployed to a ledger”. By entering the instance in a ledger, the transaction is based on electronically verifiable conditions.)
an intelligent agent system configure to: (see figure 1 and paragraph [0856] and [0860])
interact with the smart contract services of the smart contract system to configure
at least one smart contract, (paragraph [0856], “the API system 108 may include a smart contract API that allows smart contracts to interface with the platform, a utility API, a merchant API that allows merchants to create tokens corresponding to virtual representations of items, and any other suitable APIs.”)
wherein the at least one smart contract is configured to interface with a game engine generated environment; and (figure 1 show the interface between the platform 100, an API system 108, an intelligence and automation system 110, and/or virtual world presence system 114)
invoke the predefined tools to configure the game engine generated environment. (paragraph [0856], “the platform 100 may implement a micro services architecture such that services may be accessed by clients, such as by APIs and/or software development kits (SDKs) … SDK types include, but are not limited to: an Android SDK, an iOS SDK, a Windows SDK, a JavaScript SDK, a PHP SDK, a Python SDK, a Swift SDK, a Ruby SDK, and the like.”)
In regards to claims 4-5 and 13-14,
wherein the digital wallet services include purchasing digital tokens and selling digital tokens and wherein the digital wallet services include token exchange services. (Paragraph [0841])
In regards to claims 6 and 15,
wherein the digital wallet services include storing funds. (Paragraph [0912], see above citation)
In regards to claims 20 and 23,
wherein invoking the predefined tools to configure the game engine generated environment comprises determining a game engine configuration for a desired operation, and configuring the game engine generated environment based on the game engine configuration. (paragraph [0856], “SDK types include, but are not limited to: an Android SDK, an iOS SDK, a Windows SDK, a JavaScript SDK, a PHP SDK, a Python SDK, a Swift SDK, a Ruby SDK, and the like.”)
In regards to claims 21 and 24,
wherein invoking the predefined tools to configure the game engine generated environment comprises determining a resource for a desired operation, and configuring the game engine generated environment to use the resource. (paragraph [0856], “The services abstract away the complexities of blockchain creation, object handling, ownership transfers, data integration, identity management, and the like, so that platform users can easily build, deliver and/or consume platform capabilities. In embodiments, SDK types include, but are not limited to: an Android SDK, an iOS SDK, a Windows SDK, a JavaScript SDK, a PHP SDK, a Python SDK, a Swift SDK, a Ruby SDK, and the like.” Blockchain creation, object handling, ownership transfers, data integration, identity management, and the like are considered to be resources to be used in the environment.)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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, 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.
Claims 7 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yantis et al. (US PG pub 2022/0067710) in view of Lin et al. (US PG pub 2018/0121908).
Yantis et al., as applied above, shows all of the limitations of the claims except for specifying that the digital wallet services include searching.
Lin et al. teaches, paragraph [0092], “instruct the directory service 114 to search for matching fields over the stored credit card instruments associated with the digital wallet. If the payment source specified by the received payment information does not match to any stored payment source for the digital wallet, then the logic module 110 can be configured to generate payment failure data which is transmitted to the merchant application 119.”
Based on the teaching of Lin et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the Yantis et al. invention to incorporate that the digital wallet services include searching in order to improve security and data management.
Claims 8-9 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yantis et al. (US PG pub 2022/0067710) in view of Chalkias (US PG pub 2019/0295050).
Yantis et al., as applied above, shows all of the limitations of the claims except for specifying that the digital wallet services include allowing single authorization for shared funds or the digital wallet services include allowing multi-signature authorization for the shared funds.
Chalkias teaches, paragraph [0010], “Although such multi-signature authorizations provide a much higher level of security than single-signature authorizations, such multi-signature authorizations require a pre-specified threshold number of signatures and the signatures of any of the authorizing parties can be used to meet that threshold number. Moreover, such multi-signature authorizations do not support options such as requiring either the signatures of two specified persons or only the signature of a different specified person (e.g., the president and the controller of a company or just the signature of a board member).”
Based on the teaching of Chalkias, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the Yantis et al. invention to incorporate that the digital wallet services include allowing single authorization for shared funds or the digital wallet services include allowing multi-signature authorization for the shared funds in order to provide degrees of security depending on the transaction.
Claims 19 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yantis et al. (US PG pub 2022/0067710) in view of Franchitti (US PG pub 2019/0171438).
Yantis et al., as applied above, shows all of the limitations of the claims except for negotiating variables for the at least one smart contract on behalf of the party to the transaction.
Franchitti teaches, paragraph [0656], “The Baanda™ solution implements KAEAM knowledge management processes that are specific to the legal contract negotiation context by leveraging the DKMF P2P node's BPM capabilities.” The Baanda™ solution is used on a blockchain platform and includes Smart Contracts, see whole paragraph [0656].
Based on the teaching of Franchitti, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the Yantis et al. invention to incorporate Baanda™ solution including negotiating variables for the at least one smart contract on behalf of the party to the transaction in order to provide a better full-service product.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/2/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant asserts that “the pending rejections should be withdrawn because the cited references do not disclose the above-recited features in combination with the remaining features of the claims, and therefore do not anticipate or render obvious the independent claims after the amendments.” The examiner does not concur. The rejection has been modified to reflect the amended claims.
No further arguments were presented.
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 concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL A CUFF whose telephone number is (571)272-6778. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9-5.
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, Xuan Thai can be reached at 571 272-7147. 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.
/MICHAEL A CUFF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715