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 .
Priority
Should applicant desire to obtain the benefit of foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) prior to declaration of an interference, a certified English translation of the foreign application must be submitted in reply to this action. 37 CFR 41.154(b) and 41.202(e).
Failure to provide a certified translation may result in no benefit being accorded for the non-English application.
Acknowledgements
Claims 1, 3 and 10 have been amended. Claims 4-6 and 8-9 have been canceled. Claims 11-15 have been added. Claims 1-3, 7, and 10-15 are pending and presented for examination.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments, filed 12/30/2025, with respect to claim 1 have overcome the claim objection set forth in the Non-Final Rejection 10/01/2025. Therefore, the claim objection to claim 1 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments, filed 12/30/2025, with respect to claims 1 and 10 present a new matter issue under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) rejection. For purposes of brevity, please see below for more details.
Applicant’s arguments, see pgs. 7-8, filed 12/30/2025, with respect to the limitation “and wherein the amount of the cryptocurrency added is increased, when the user holds a keyboard NFT and a word NFT, based on usage frequency of a word corresponding to the word NFT held by the user and entered through the virtual keyboard” are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Kim U.S. 2020/0258079. Furthermore, although Checo U.S. 2024/0070711 does not disclose the amount of the cryptocurrency added is increased based on usage frequency of a word entered through the virtual keyboard, Checo does disclose the amount of cryptocurrency added is increased based on usage of a word entered through the virtual keyboard in [0025]. Applicant has not provided any specific remarks against Checo that need to be addressed here. Please see below for the prior art combination and rationale.
In response to the Applicant’s remarks regarding a “clickable link,” the current claim language reads “wherein the skin includes a clickable link to a homepage or an application of an affiliated company…” Use of the word “or” requires only one of the listed options, the options being 1) a clickable link to a homepage, or 2) an application of an affiliated company. Cho et al. English machine translation of KR20190009165 (herein as “Cho”) was previously used to teach such limitation. Please see below for more details.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 10 are objected to because of the following informalities: “increased, when the user holds a keyboard NFT” should be “increased Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-3, 7, and 10-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 10 recite “ performing on-chain interactions on the blockchain at preset link timing…” The specification does not disclose or suggest that the performance of the on-chain interactions on the blockchain are performed at preset link timing. The specification discloses providing an on-chain service by linking the on-chain user wallet with the virtual blockchain user wallet at preset link timing [0013, 0022, 0077, 00244, 00268, 00291]. However, this does not provide support for performing on-chain interactions on the blockchain at preset link timing. Therefore, the claims introduce new matter.
Claim 3 recites “matching an off-chain address of the off-chain-based virtual blockchain user with an on-chain address of the on-chain user wallet to synchronize the off-chain-based virtual blockchain user wallet and the on-chain user wallet.” The specification does not disclose or suggest synchronizing the off-chain-based virtual blockchain user wallet and the on-chain user wallet. The specification discloses that the off-chain address at which the virtual blockchain user wallet is created may be identical to an on-chain address at which the on-chain user wallet is created in at least [0067] of the disclosure, however, this does not suggest that the wallets are synchronized. Therefore, the claim introduces new matter.
Claim 15 recites “wherein at least one of the durability attribute or the efficiency attribute is increased when the skin associated with the virtual keyboard NFT is applied to the virtual keyboard.” The specification discloses at least in [00121] increasing keyboard NFT attribute based on a given stat point. However, there is no disclosure or suggestion that applying a skin increases the attribute(s) or applying a skin provides a stat point. The specification also discloses in at least [00134] increasing the default values of the NFT attributes depends on keyboard NFT reinforcement. However, there is no disclosure or suggestion that the keyboard NFT reinforcement is the same as applying the skin to the virtual keyboard. Therefore, the claim introduces new matter.
Claims 2-3, 7, and 11-15 depend from claim 1. They do not cure the deficiencies presented above. Therefore, they are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) for at least their dependency from a rejected base claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 1-3, 7, 10, 12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kilroe et al. WO 2019/043668 (herein referred to as “Kilroe”) in view of Checo U.S. 2024/0070711, in view of Andral U.S. 2024/0152912, in view of Cho et al. English machine translation of KR20190009165 (herein as “Cho”), and further in view of Kim U.S. 2020/0258079.
Re Claim 1, Kilroe discloses a method for providing a virtual keyboard service, comprising:
creating, by a service provider […], an on-chain user wallet on a blockchain to perform operations […] and an off-chain-based virtual blockchain user wallet corresponding to the on-chain user wallet on an off-chain network (pg. 27, 3rd paragraph – “Each of a plurality of users are provided {302A) with an in-game wallet. The in-game wallet may be off-chain wallets… (which means not on the blockchain), and are suitable for storing $DTB required to transaction with a gaming store of a digital gaming platform (i.e. off-chain network)…At least some of the users may be provided (304A) with an out-of-game wallet, envisaged to be on-chain wallets,” the wallets are provided in an online gaming platform, i.e. service provider, and both wallets are associated with a user, and therefore correspond to each other, pg. 13, last paragraph – “A blockchain may be used to track the cryptocurrency tokens”);
enabling an application executed on a user terminal of the user to access the off-chain-based virtual blockchain user wallet […] to add cryptocurrency obtained […] to the off-chain-based virtual blockchain user wallet without performing on-chain interactions (pg. 27, 3rd paragraph – “The in-game wallets may be off-chain wallets (which means not on the blockchain), and are suitable for storing $DTB required to transact with a gaming store of a digital gaming platform,” thereby suggesting the user accessing the in-game wallet to use $DTB enables said user to transact within the digital gaming platform (i.e. enabling an application…without performing on-chain interactions), pg. 28, 1st paragraph – “A non-transferrable in-game currency may be provided (340A) which may be purchasable in exchange for $DTB and may be stored in the user’s in-game wallet. The non-transferrable in-game currency may be usable to transact with whilst playing the game” thereby suggesting when the user plays the game, cryptocurrency can be added to the in-game wallet, i.e. off-chain-based virtual blockchain user wallet); and
performing on-chain interactions on the blockchain at preset link timing, by the service provider, using linking between the on-chain user wallet and the off-chain-based virtual blockchain user wallet (pg. 15, 2nd paragraph – “”providing” a user with an out-of-game may include “associating” (i.e. linking) an existing out-of-game wallet of the user with their in-game wallet,” “The out-of-game wallet (104) may be on-chain, meaning that it may operate using blockchain technology (i.e. performing on-chain interactions on the blockchain), allowing users to store digital assets and cryptocurrency ($DTB) outside of the game (i.e. performing on-chain interactions using linking between the wallets.” Under the broadest, most reasonable interpretation, “preset link timing” is interpreted to be at any time while the wallets are linked. Pg. 17, 2nd paragraph discloses withdrawing from the in-game wallet and depositing an equivalent value into the out-of-game wallet, i.e. performing on-chain interactions at preset link timing).
However, Kilroe does not expressly disclose
a virtual keyboard service;
an on-chain user wallet to perform operations associated with a virtual keyboard non-fungible token (NFT);
add cryptocurrency obtained through use of a virtual keyboard associated with the virtual keyboard NFT, and
wherein the amount of cryptocurrency added is increased, when the user holds a keyboard NFT, based on usage of a word entered through the virtual keyboard.
Checo discloses a method of incentivizing a consumer to share data useful for ad targeting includes providing a mobile application with a dedicated digital keyboard and an integrated blockchain wallet. Specifically, Checo discloses
a virtual keyboard service [0017] – “a mobile application comprising a Web3 keyboard integrated with a smart contract dashboard and a crypto wallet, enabling a type-to-earn functionality”;
an on-chain user wallet to perform operations associated with a virtual keyboard non-fungible token (NFT) (The instant specification discloses a keyboard NFT allows chats or communication to be monitored, stored, and/or managed when the virtual keyboard is used [0093-94]. In Checo, [0020] – “Data is collected from the Keyboard (“Unblok”)…the keyboard software collects 1st Person Data,” therefore, the keyboard in Checo is analogous to the virtual keyboard NFT because it also allows the monitoring, storage, and/or managing of data collected from using the keyboard. Furthermore, the rewards from using the keyboard is deposited into a connected crypto wallet, therefore, the crypto wallet and the keyboard are associated [0021]);
add cryptocurrency obtained through use of a virtual keyboard associated with the virtual keyboard NFT ([0024] – “The Unblok Keyboard (i.e. virtual keyboard NFT) is integrated at the top of a Web 3 Stack at a user experience layer between the mobile users and a mobile application layer,” [0028] – “the user types on the keyboard graphical interface (i.e. virtual keyboard),” [0025] – user can earn cryptocurrency by using such keyboard, and rewards are stored in the user’s crypto wallet), and
wherein the amount of cryptocurrency added is increased, when the user holds a keyboard NFT, based on usage of a word entered through the virtual keyboard. ([0025] – user sets up the keyboard(s), i.e. user holds a keyboard NFT, once keyboard is set up, user may type on the new keyboard, receive targeted ads based on the keywords they have typed, and receive crypto rewards).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kilroe’s cryptocurrency system for use in an online marketplace/gaming platform with the teachings of the inventive keyboard and earning crypto rewards in Checo. One would be motivated to make such a combination to incentivize a consumer to share useful data without overburdening the consumer, and deliver the shared data to businesses and advertisers to enable targeted advertising Checo [0007-8].
However, Kilroe in view of Checo do not explicitly teach the following limitations italicized:
storing a public key and a private key of a user by the service provider;
access the off-chain-based virtual blockchain user wallet using the public key and the private key.
Andral discloses an authentication system and method for cryptocurrency transactions. Specifically, Andral discloses
storing a public key and a private key of a user by the service provider [0063] – “The server computer 104 can store the user’s public key and private key on behalf of the user.”;
access the off-chain-based virtual blockchain user wallet using the public key and the private key ([0025] – “A “digital wallet” may contain electronic information for conducting transactions…and can be used in a variety of transactions, such as but not limited to eCommerce, social networks, money transfer/personal payments…gaming…,” i.e. off-chain-based virtual blockchain user wallet, [0063] – “The user’s public key and private key can be utilized to perform cryptocurrency transactions,” [0181] - losing the public key and the private key means the user loses access to their digital wallet, thereby suggesting to access the wallet, a user must use the public key and the private key).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kilroe in view of Checo’s cryptocurrency system for use in an online marketplace/gaming platform with the teachings of a server providing and storing the user’s public and private keys to access their digital wallet(s) in Andral. One would be motivated to make such a combination because it would increase security in the event that the user loses their user device that contained their public and private keys Andral, [0063] and allow for the user to easily reauthenticate with the system after losing their user device to retain access to their digital wallet Andral, [0181].
However, Kilroe in view of Checo and Andral do not explicitly teach
wherein an amount of the cryptocurrency added is increased when a skin associated with the virtual keyboard NFT is applied to the virtual keyboard,
wherein the skin includes a clickable link to a homepage or an application of an affiliated company that provides a brand theme associated with the skin.
Cho discloses an apparatus for providing reward points to a user through a skin image of a virtual keyboard. Specifically, Cho discloses
wherein an amount of the cryptocurrency added is increased when a skin associated with the virtual keyboard NFT is applied to the virtual keyboard (pg. 9, 2nd paragraph, “the reward providing devices applies the virtual keyboard skins to the called virtual keyboard…and provides reward points to the user…and the user can accumulate reward points (i.e. an amount of the cryptocurrency added is increased) and use them as money”),
wherein the skin includes a clickable link to a homepage or an application of an affiliated company that provides a brand theme associated with the skin (pg. 8, 8th paragraph – “The virtual keyboard skins with the alcohol advertisement provided by the liquor company inserted in the background can be applied,” i.e. an application of an affiliated company that provides a brand theme).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kilroe in view of Checo and Andral’s cryptocurrency system for use in an online marketplace/gaming platform with the teachings of virtual keyboard skins in Cho. One would be motivated to make this combination to allow users to generate revenue and rewards by using the virtual keyboard skins, and allow users who lack money to indirectly support/sponsor politician’s, entertainers, non-governmental organizations, and artists Cho, pg. 10, 8th- 9th paragraphs.
However, Kilroe in view of Checo, Andral, and Cho do not explicitly teach
wherein the amount of cryptocurrency added is increased, when the user holds a word NFT, based on usage frequency of a word corresponding to the word NFT held by the user.
Kim discloses a text currency platform system. Specifically, Kim discloses
wherein the amount of cryptocurrency added is increased, when the user holds a word NFT, based on usage frequency of a word corresponding to the word NFT held by the user ([0023] – “The text currency payment unit 236 may pay the text currency to a virtual currency account of the supporter according to the texting activity for each supporter,” [0020] – “the text currency issuing unit 232 determines the number of searches for the registered text (i.e. word NFT)…the text currency issuing unit 232 determines the amount of issuance in proportion to the number of searches (i.e. usage frequency) for the registered texts,” [0005] – user requests registration of a text, i.e. word NFT held by the user).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kilroe in view of Checo, Andral, and Cho’s cryptocurrency system for use in an online marketplace/gaming platform with the teachings of paying text currency based on usage frequency of a registered text in Kim. One would be motivated to make this combination to provide a new type of cryptocurrency issuance to alleviate the increasing resource and power consumption of cryptocurrency mining Kim, [0002], [0009].
Re Claim 2, Kilroe in view of Checo, Andral, Cho, and Kim teach the method of claim 1, and Kilroe in view of Checo, Andral, Cho, and Kim further teach further comprising:
charging a fee for lending the on-chain user wallet and the off-chain-based virtual blockchain user wallet to the user at intervals of a preset period (Kilroe, pg. 26, 1st paragraph – user may be charged a withdrawal fee when they transfer $DTB from their in-game wallet to their out-of-game wallet, i.e. lending. pg. 29, 3rd paragraph – the user is charged in response to the transfer, therefore, they are charged at a specific time period. Under the broadest, most reasonable interpretation, “intervals of a preset period” has been broadly recited such that any set time period could reasonably read upon the limitation. A user being charged a fee upon withdrawal is a specific time period that is reasonably preset, or predefined, because it is a known, incurred fee for a specific process).
Re Claim 3, Kilroe in view of Checo, Andral, Cho, and Kim teach the method of claim 1, and Kilroe in view of Checo, Andral, Cho, and Kim further teach further comprising matching an off-chain address of the off-chain-based virtual blockchain user wallet with an on-chain address of the on-chain user wallet to synchronize the off-chain-based virtual blockchain user wallet and the on-chain user wallet (Kilroe, pg. 17, 2nd paragraph – “When a user removes $DTBT from their in-game wallet and via the internet-based portal (132), an equivalent value of $DTB is transferred (134) from the cryptocurrency reserve, and from there transferred (136) to the user’s out-of-game wallet (104),” i.e. synchronize, pg. 24, last paragraph – “”providing” a user with an out-of-game wallet may include “associating” an existing out-of-game wallet of the user with their in-game wallet.”)
Under the broadest, most reasonable interpretation, an “address” can encompass a user’s address, such as a physical location, IP address, etc. Kilroe discloses that a user may have an out-of-game wallet and an in-game wallet, see at least pg. 15, 2nd paragraph. Since both wallets are associated with the user, they can reasonably have matching addresses, which is that of the user’s (e.g. physical location, IP address, etc.).
Re Claim 7, Kilroe in view of Checo, Andral, Cho, and Kim teach the method of claim 1, and Kilroe in view of Checo, Andral, Cho, and Kim further teach wherein:
the cryptocurrency corresponds to a first token that is a keyboard token usable in the virtual keyboard service (Checo [0021] – consumer may be rewarded by crypto tokens that may be redeemed for NFTs, [0019] – NFTs may include themes, stickers, emojis, and avatars, and therefore usable in the virtual keyboard service), and
the first token is exchangeable with a second token that is a governance token capable of being encashed in a cryptocurrency exchange (Checo [0021] – consumer may be rewarded by crypto tokens that may be redeemed. Reward denominations may be selected from traditional fiat currencies, i.e. encashed).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kilroe’s cryptocurrency system for use in an online marketplace/gaming platform with the teachings of the inventive keyboard that earns cryptocurrencies in Checo. One would be motivated to make such a combination to incentivize a consumer to share useful data without overburdening the consumer, and deliver the shared data to businesses and advertisers to enable targeted advertising Checo [0007-8].
Re Claim 10, it is the apparatus claim of method claim 1. It recites similar distinguishing features as claim 1. Furthermore, Kilroe discloses a processor for performing any or all of the steps described pg. 32, 3rd paragraph, and a memory component for storing software units and instructions provided to the processor to carry out the functionality of the described components pg. 21, 6th paragraph, Figure 4. Therefore, claim 10 is rejected for the same reasons above.
Re Claim 12, Kilroe in view of Checo, Andral, Cho, and Kim teach the method of claim 1, wherein the virtual keyboard NFT has a plurality of grades, wherein each of the grades has different default value for efficiency and durability attributes.
Method claim 12 does not recite any method steps. It merely provides context to the virtual keyboard NFT. Such language is considered nonfunctional descriptive language. The plurality of grades of the virtual keyboard NFT does not meaningfully limit the method for providing a virtual keyboard service. Therefore, claim 12 cannot be given patentable weight.
Re Claim 14, Kilroe in view of Checo, Andral, Cho, and Kim teach the method of claim 1, and Kilroe in view of Checo, Andral, Cho, and Kim further teach further comprising performing external control to enable deposit of the cryptocurrency to the on-chain user wallet but not withdrawal of the cryptocurrency from the on-chain user wallet (Kilroe, pg. 26, 1st and 2nd paragraphs – user may be charged a withdrawal fee when they wish to transfer $DTB from their in-game wallet to their out-of-game wallet, i.e. deposit. Charging a withdrawal fee is analogous to performing an external control. The withdrawal fee is only for withdrawing from the in-game wallet to transfer to the out-of-game wallet, and not for withdrawing from the out-of-game wallet. Therefore, charging the withdrawal fee does not enable withdrawing from the out-of-game wallet).
Statement Regarding the Prior Art
The prior art does not teach or suggest the limitations of claim 11. Claims 13 and 15 depend from claim 11, and therefore, incorporate all the limitations of claim 11.
Specifically, the prior art Kilroe, Checo, Andral, Cho, and Kim, alone or in combination, do not teach or suggest calculating the amount of cryptocurrency increased based on keyboard usage multiplied by an efficiency attribute multiplied by a residual durability rate of the durability attribute.
Therefore, the prior art, whether alone or in combination, do not teach or suggest the limitations of claim 11.
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 CHRISTINE DANG whose telephone number is (571)270-5880. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5pm MT.
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, Patrick McAtee can be reached at (571) 272-7575. 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.
/C.D./Examiner, Art Unit 3698
/PATRICK MCATEE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3698