DETAILED ACTION
713.09 Interviews Between Final Rejection and Notice of Appeal [R-08.2017]
Normally, one interview after final rejection is permitted in order to place the application in condition for allowance or to resolve issues prior to appeal. However, prior to the interview, the intended purpose and content of the interview should be presented briefly, preferably in writing. Such an interview may be granted if the examiner is convinced that disposal or clarification for appeal may be accomplished with only nominal further consideration. Interviews merely to restate arguments of record or to discuss new limitations which would require more than nominal reconsideration or new search should be denied. See MPEP § 714.13.
Interviews may be held after the expiration of the shortened statutory period and prior to the maximum permitted statutory period of 6 months without an extension of time. See MPEP § 706.07(f).
A second or further interview after a final rejection may be held if the examiner is convinced that it will expedite the issues for appeal or disposal of the application.
For interviews after notice of appeal, see MPEP § 1204.03.
Authorization for Internet Communications
The examiner encourages Applicant to submit an authorization to communicate with the examiner via the Internet by making the following statement (from MPEP 502.03):
“Recognizing that Internet communications are not secure, I hereby authorize the USPTO to communicate with the undersigned and practitioners in accordance with 37 CFR 1.33 and 37 CFR 1.34 concerning any subject matter of this application by video conferencing, instant messaging, or electronic mail. I understand that a copy of these communications will be made of record in the application file.”
Please note that the above statement can only be submitted via Central Fax (not Examiner's Fax), Regular postal mail, or EFS Web using PTO/SB/439.
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 §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, 3 – 5, 7, 21, 23 – 25, 27, 29 and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
The claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter because the claim(s) as a whole, considering all claim elements both individually and in combination, do no amount to significantly more than an abstract idea. For example, claim 1 recites, in substance, receiving a token identifier; using the token identifier to retrieve a resource identifier; fetching digital data from a storage location; and rendering the digital data in a browser tab. These limitations collectively describe information processing, including: identifying data, retrieving data and displaying data to a user. Such activities constitute certain methods of organizing information and a data retrieval and display, which are recognized abstract idea found by the courts to be an abstract idea (Electric Power Group).
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 a browser application, a blockchain network, a storage location, and a digital asset application merely use(s) at a high level of generality and performs only their well-understood, routine, and conventional functions, namely: browsers render content, blockchains store and retrieve token metadata and storage location host digital data. 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 recite inventive concept sufficient to transform the abstract idea into patent-eligible subject matter. All additional elements, individually and in combination are conventional, generic, and used according to their ordinary purpose. The claim is not patent eligible.
Claims 21 and 29 are the product and system claims of the abstract method claim above.
Claims 3 – 5, 7, 23 – 25, 27 and 31 do not include elements that amount to significantly more than the abstract idea because all of the elements in those claims merely adds pre/post extra-solution activity to the abstract idea.
Claims 2, 6, 8, 22, 26, 28, 30 and 32 - 33 include elements that amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 6, 8, 22, 26, 28, 30 and 32 – 33 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 10/29/2025, with respect to 103 rejection have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 103 rejection of claims 1 - 20 have been withdrawn.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Pezeskhi (US 11,558,344 B1) discloses receiving a request to resolve a name of a domain of an identifier of web content; automatically determining that the name of the domain is to be resolved using a blockchain; determining an identifier of a non-fungible token corresponding to the domain of the identifier of the web content; using the identifier of the non-fungible token to send a request to a smart contract of the blockchain to obtain one or more resolution records for the domain, wherein the blockchain stores the non-fungible token associating the domain to an account address of an owner of the domain; receiving the one or more resolution records of the domain; and utilizing the received one or more resolution records to resolve the name of the domain.
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 SYED A RONI whose telephone number is (571)270-7806. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:00 pm (EST).
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, Jeffrey L Nickerson can be reached at (469) 295-9235. 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.
/SYED A RONI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2432