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 .
Response to Amendment
This action is in response to the applicant’s communication received on 12/01/2025.
Status of the Claims
This is Final office action rejection prepared in response to applicant’s amendments filed on
December 01, 2025.
Claims 1, 3-4, 6, and 15-18 are amended.
Claims 9-14 are withdrawn.
Claims 1-8 and 15-20 are pending.
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 1-8 and 15-20 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 15 recite the limitation “establishing a cryptographically secure communications link between a computing device and a database to facilitate, at least in part, digital asset management:” which introduce new matter not originally disclosed on the specification. The originally filed specifications and drawings do not contain any description, suggestion or mention of a cryptographically secure communications link being establish between the computing device and the database. Therefore, because the original specifications fail to reasonably convey to a person of ordinary skills in the art that the applicant had possession of the claimed concept, the limitation constitutes new matter under 35 U.S.C. 112(a). The applicant is advised to delete or amend the unsupported limitation.
Claims 2-8 and 16-20 are also rejected as they depend from either claims 1 or 15.
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 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1: Claims 1-8 are directed to a method (i.e., process). Claims 15-20 are directed to a computer-readable medium (i.e., manufacture). Therefore, these claims fall within the four statutory categories of invention, and thus must be further analyzed at Step 2A to determine if the claims are directed to a judicial exception (See MPEP 2106.03, subsection II).
Step 2A Prong One: Claim 1, recites (i.e., sets forth or describes) an abstract idea. More specifically, the following bolded claim elements recite abstract ideas while the non-bolded claim elements recite additional elements according to MPEP 2106.04(a).
A method comprising:
establishing a cryptographically secure communications link between a computing device and a database to facilitate, at least in part, digital asset management:
receiving, at the computing device, one or more digital signals indicative of a particular input, wherein the particular input indicates, at least in part, a particular digital wallet;
accessing, via the cryptographically secure communications link, the database based at least in part on a particular wallet identifier for the particular digital wallet, wherein the particular digital wallet holds at least one token for at least one digital asset;
determining, via at least the database, data indicative of at least one digital asset, the data having been formatted according to at least one of a plurality of protocols and including at least a first resource identifier for one or more locations of digital content;
making available the determined data for use by at least one of the following: a mobile application, a distributed application, an online exchange, a content creator, a web-based service, an electronically distributed ledger, a web browser, a program to facilitate online transactions, or any combination thereof;
initiating one or more processes based at least in part on the use of the determined data.
Claim 1, recites (i.e., sets forth or describes) a method for processing input to identify, retrieve and use asset data from a database and enabling further processes based on the data. The claim achieves this by establishing a secure connection with a database, receiving an input for a wallet, querying the database using the wallet identifier, determining data related to an asset, displaying the retrieved data and initiating other processes based on the retrieved data. Claim 15 is significantly similar to claim 1. As such claim 15 also recite an abstract idea. Specifically, but for the additional elements, the claim under its broadest reasonable interpretation recites limitations grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas (i.e., fundamental economic practices).
Step 2A Prong Two: Because the claim recites abstract ideas, the analysis proceeds to
determine whether the claim recites additional elements that recite a practical application of the
abstract ideas. Here, the additional elements of a database, a mobile application, a distributed application, an online exchange, a content creator, a web-based service, an electronically distributed ledger, a web browser, a program to facilitate online transactions, a computing device and a cryptographically secure communications link merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea (MPEP § 2106.05(f)). Further, the additional element “digital” generally links the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, that being of digital assets (MPEP § 2106.05(h)). Therefore, the claim as a whole fail to recite a practical application of the abstract ideas.
Step 2B: Determines whether the claim as a whole amount to significantly more than the exception itself. Evaluating additional elements to determine whether they amount to an inventive concept requires considering them both individually and in combination to ensure that they amount to significantly more than the judicial exception itself. Here, the additional elements, taken individually and in combination, do not result in the claim as a whole, amounting to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed previously with respect to Step 2A, the additional elements merely serve as a tool to perform an abstract idea. Thus, there is no inventive concept in the claim and thus the claim is not eligible, warranting a rejection for lack of subject matter eligibility and concluding the eligibility analysis.
Dependent Claims: Claims 2-8 and 16-20 have also been analyzed for subject matter
eligibility. However, claims 2-8 and 16-20 also fail to recite patent eligible subject matter for the
following reasons:
Claim 2 recites the following bolded claim elements as abstract ideas while the
non-bolded claim elements recite additional elements according to MPEP 2106.04(a).
the one or more locations comprise at least one of the following: a memory, the database, a local storage, a remote storage, or any combination thereof.
The claim further recites the abstract idea of a method for processing input to identify, retrieve and use asset data from a database and enabling further use or action on different processes. In other words, it recites limitations grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The non-bolded additional elements fail to recite a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea because it merely serves as a tool to perform the abstract idea (MPEP §2106.05(f)). The additional elements of a memory, the database, a local storage, a remote storage, or any combination thereof are recited at a high level generally amounting to no more than a tool to perform the abstract idea also failing to recite a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea.
Claims 3 and 16 recite the following bolded claim elements as abstract ideas while the
non-bolded claim elements recite additional elements according to MPEP 2106.04(a).
the digital content comprises a plurality of media files, and initiating one or more processes comprises presenting the media files on the computing device.
The claim further recites the abstract idea of a method for processing input to identify, retrieve and use asset data from a database and enabling further use or action on different processes. In other words, it recites limitations grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The non-bolded additional elements fail to recite a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea because it merely serves as a tool to perform the abstract idea (MPEP §2106.05(f)). The additional elements of a computing device is recited at a high level generally amounting to no more than a tool to perform the abstract idea also failing to recite a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea. Further, the additional element “digital” generally links the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, that being of digital assets (MPEP § 2106.05(h)).
Claims 4 and 17 recite the following bolded claim elements as abstract ideas while the
non-bolded claim elements recite additional elements according to MPEP 2106.04(a).
presenting a list of the digital content on the computing device;
receiving input indicative of a selection of listed digital content; and
retrieving the selected digital content according to the at least one of the plurality of protocols.
The claim further recites the abstract idea of a method for processing input to identify, retrieve and use asset data from a database and enabling further use or action on different processes. In other words, it recites limitations grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The non-bolded additional elements fail to recite a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea because it merely serves as a tool to perform the abstract idea (MPEP §2106.05(f)). The additional elements of a computing device is recited at a high level generally amounting to no more than a tool to perform the abstract idea also failing to recite a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea. Further, the additional element “digital” generally links the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, that being of digital assets (MPEP § 2106.05(h)).
Claim 5 recites the following bolded claim elements as abstract ideas while the
non-bolded claim elements recite additional elements according to MPEP 2106.04(a).
the one or more processes further comprise storing metadata associated with the digital content in the database.
The claim further recites the abstract idea of a method for processing input to identify, retrieve and use asset data from a database and enabling further use or action on different processes. In other words, it recites limitations grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The non-bolded additional elements fail to recite a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea because it merely serves as a tool to perform the abstract idea (MPEP §2106.05(f)). Further, the additional element “digital” generally links the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, that being of digital assets (MPEP § 2106.05(h)).
Claims 6 and 18 recite the following bolded claim elements as abstract ideas while the
non-bolded claim elements recite additional elements according to MPEP 2106.04(a).
initiating one or more processes comprises initiating an electronic transaction involving a digital asset of the at least one digital asset, the electronic transaction initiated according to a corresponding protocol of the plurality of protocols.
The claim further recites the abstract idea of a method for processing input to identify, retrieve and use asset data from a database and enabling further use or action on different processes. In other words, it recites limitations grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The non-bolded additional elements fail to recite a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea because it merely serves as a tool to perform the abstract idea (MPEP §2106.05(f)). Further, the additional element “digital” generally links the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, that being of digital assets (MPEP § 2106.05(h)).
Claims 7 and 19 recite the following bolded claim elements as abstract ideas while the
non-bolded claim elements recite additional elements according to MPEP 2106.04(a).
initiating the electronic transaction comprises initiating an update of the electronically distributed ledger according to the corresponding protocol.
The claim further recites the abstract idea of a method for processing input to identify, retrieve and use asset data from a database and enabling further use or action on different processes. In other words, it recites limitations grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The non-bolded additional elements fail to recite a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea because it merely serves as a tool to perform the abstract idea (MPEP §2106.05(f)). Further, the additional element “digital” generally links the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, that being of digital assets (MPEP § 2106.05(h)).
Claims 8 and 20 recite the following bolded claim elements as abstract ideas while the
non-bolded claim elements recite additional elements according to MPEP 2106.04(a).
determining the data further comprises: determining whether the data is indicative of an additional digital asset comprising additional digital content and has been formatted according to a different protocol than the at least one of the plurality of protocols, wherein the additional digital content has been identified via a second resource identifier.
The claim further recites the abstract idea of a method for processing input to identify, retrieve and use asset data from a database and enabling further use or action on different processes. In other words, it recites limitations grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The non-bolded additional elements fail to recite a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea because it merely serves as a tool to perform the abstract idea (MPEP §2106.05(f)). Further, the additional element “digital” generally links the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, that being of digital assets (MPEP § 2106.05(h)).
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 1-3, 5-7, 15-16 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 2023/0353570 A1) in view of Speasl (US 2021/0409489 A1).
Regarding claim 1 and 15, Lee discloses:
establishing a cryptographically secure communications link between a computing device and a database to facilitate, at least in part, digital asset management: (¶0162, In operation 1102, a user device establishes a connection with the system. The system may include a web server that receives an HTTP request from a web browser operating on the user device, for example. In another example, the system may operate an app server that receives a connection request, for instance using an API, from a mobile application operating on the user device. The user device and the system may engage in authentication/login protocol, or the like, as part of establishing the connection and authenticating the user device. ¶0082, In this example, the system 1000 includes a network-connected server, which in this example is an e-commerce system 1004, and a plurality of user devices 1002. The user devices 1002 and e-commerce system 1004 may communicate over a network 1006. The network 1006 may include interconnected wired and/or wireless networks, including the Internet. The user devices 1002 may include a range of computing devices, such as laptops, desktops, tablets, smartphones, and the like. ¶0086, In this example, the network 1006 further includes a blockchain network 1030. The blockchain network 1030 may operate in accordance with a blockchain protocol, such as Bitcoin or Ethereum, as examples.)
receiving, at the computing device, one or more digital signals indicative of a particular input; wherein the particular input indicates, at least in part, a particular digital wallet; (¶0039, receiving, from the user device, an NFT identifier and a wallet identifier; ¶0055, receiving a token identifier or a wallet identifier from the user device…)
accessing, via the cryptographically secure communications link, the database based at least in part on a particular wallet identifier for the particular digital wallet, wherein (¶0039, querying the blockchain network using the NFT identifier or the wallet identifier. ¶0055, …and querying a blockchain network to confirm ownership of the at least one non-fungible token by the user device. ¶0133, When the NFT attributes for one of the NFTs owned by the user device match the access condition, the system may verify that the NFT is owned by the user device by querying the blockchain in operation 632. The system may perform this verification earlier in the method 600, such as when it obtains NFT data from the user device. The verification may include querying a blockchain node and providing an NFT identifier as part of the query. The response message may identifier the owner of the NFT identified in the query. The owner data may be a wallet address (e.g. wallet identifier), for example, or other identifier that may be associated with the user device. The NFT data obtained from the user device may include one or more wallet addresses or wallet identifiers and may include proof of ownership of those addresses, such as by way of one or more cryptographic signatures. In some cases, the blockchain query may be a query that provides one or more wallet addresses, and the response message may include a list of all NFTs owned by those wallet addresses.
the particular digital wallet holds at least one token for at least one digital asset; (¶0087, The wallet application 1032, in this example, includes NFT data with regard to one or more NFTs associated with the user device 1002. The NFT data may include, in some cases, an NFT identifier, a public key associated with the wallet (e.g. a wallet identifier), a transaction identifier associated with ownership of the NFT, an NFT collection identifier, a smart contract identifier, or other such data regarding the NFT and/or its ownership by the user device 1002. In some cases, the NFT data may include additional data regarding the NFT itself, such as associated media (e.g. image or video), attributes, or a textual description.)
initiating one or more processes based at least in part on the use of the determined data. (¶0071, In yet other examples, NFTs may be used as a “ticket” for access or as a “proof-of-attendance”. For instance, a concert ticket may be minted and recorded as an NFT, which when validated at a venue (e.g. using a QR code scanner or the like to obtain a wallet identifier and an NFT identifier and then validate ownership via a blockchain query) grants the holder of the user device access to the concert. ¶0102, A computing device that holds the corresponding private key may be used to authenticate the computing device as the owner of that public key, thereby enabling the computing device to take actions with respect to the “owned” NFT, such as transferring it to a different public key. ¶0134, Based on the ownership verification, the system denies access to the requested product page if ownership by the user device is not confirmed, as indicated by operation 630. If ownership is verified, then the system provides the requested product record to the user device in operation 624.)
Lee further discloses:
A non-transitory computer-readable medium having instructions stored thereon that, responsive to execution by a processor, cause the processor to perform or control performance of operations (¶0060, In yet another aspect, a non-transitory, computer readable storage medium is disclosed. The medium may store processor-executable instructions that, when executed, cause one or more processors to carry out the operations of one or more of the methods or processes described herein.)
Lee does not disclose, however Speasl teaches:
determining, via at least the database, data indicative of at least one digital asset, the data having been formatted according to at least one of a plurality of protocols and including at least a first resource identifier for one or more locations of digital content; (Speasl ¶0037, In some examples, a payload element can include a hash of the digital media asset that is stored in the data structure, so that a verifying device can compute a hash of the digital media asset that is stored in the data structure and compare the computed hash to the stored hash that is stored as part of the payload element of the blockchain ledger 500 to verify that the digital media asset that is stored in the data structure is accurate.)
making available the determined data for use by at least one of the following: a mobile application, a distributed application, an online exchange, a content creator, a web-based service, an electronically distributed ledger, a web browser, a program to facilitate online transactions, or any combination thereof; (Speasl ¶0031, Once the data is in the internet/cloud system 220, the data may be accessible through a web portal 240 via computing devices 230. This web portal 240 may include image-editing tools, worldwide access, and collaboration mechanisms available to other relevant individuals. Speasl ¶0074, Thus, the computer system 900 of FIG. 9 can be a personal computer, a hand held computing device, a telephone (“smartphone” or otherwise), a mobile computing device, a workstation, a server (on a server rack or otherwise), a minicomputer, a mainframe computer, a tablet computing device, a wearable device (such as a watch, a ring, a pair of glasses, or another type of jewelry or clothing or accessory), a video game console (portable or otherwise), an e-book reader, a media player device (portable or otherwise), a vehicle-based computer, another type of computing device, or some combination thereof.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to have modify Lee’s teaching with Speasl’s teaching. One of ordinary skills in the art would have been motivated in order be able to make data available to users in multiple ways and to retrieve assets from the database using a unique identifier which are well known routine operations.
Further, the claim limitation “making available the determined data for use by at least one of the following…” and “initiating one or more processes based at least in part on the use of the determined data” are conditional limitations which means that the claim limitation is only
required when the data has been determined.
Furthermore, the claimed limitation “to…” in “establishing a cryptographically secure communications link between a computing device and a database to facilitate, at least in part, digital asset management” consists of language disclosing an intended use, so it is considered but given no patentable weight. (see MPEP 2111.05, MPEP 2114 and authorities cited therein). The reference is provided for the purpose of compact prosecution.
Finally, the claimed expression of “wherein the particular digital wallet holds at least one token for at least one digital asset” does not move to distinguish over prior art as the description of what is stored in the digital wallet does not affect the positively recited steps in the claim.
Regarding claim 2, Lee and Speasl disclose each and every element of claim 1. Speasl further teaches:
the one or more locations comprise at least one of the following: a memory, the database, a local storage, a remote storage, or any combination thereof. (Speasl ¶0037, Each block includes a block header 510/540/570 and a payload 530/560/590. The payload may include one or more payload elements, such as transactions, smart contracts (e.g., executable code), and/or tokens (e.g., non-fungible tokens). The payload elements may be used to identify iterations of a digital media asset, modifications to the digital media asset, annotations made to the digital media asset, ownership of the digital media asset, transfer of ownership of the digital media asset from a first owner to a second owner, fungibility of the digital media asset, price of the digital media asset, rental of the digital asset from an owner for a limited period of time and/or with limitations on types of permissible use, metadata associated with any of the previously-listed content, or combinations thereof. In some examples, a payload element may include a copy of the digital media asset. In some examples, a payload element may include a pointer, such as a uniform resource identifier (URI) or uniform resource locator (URL), to a copy of the digital media asset that is stored in a data structure off of the distributed ledger. Examples of the data structure include a database, a distributed hash table (DHT), an InterPlanetary File System (IPFS), a tree, a hash table, or a combination thereof.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to have modify Lee and Speasl combination with Speasl’s additional teaching. One of ordinary skills in the art would have been motivated in order broaden the storage locations for the data to include different data storage architectures and no limiting to just one type of data storage, which allows for storage flexibility.
Furthermore, the claimed limitation “the one or more locations comprise at least one of the following: a memory, the database, a local storage, a remote storage, or any combination thereof” is non-functional material that does not move to distinguish over prior art as it does not affect the recited steps in claim 1.
Regarding claims 3 and 16, Lee and Speasl disclose each and every element of claim 2. Speasl further teaches:
the digital content comprises a plurality of media files, and (Speasl ¶0054, At operation 810, the digital asset tracking system receives a digital media asset from a first computing device. The digital media asset may be an image file, a video, audio, map, satellite photo, or some combination thereof. In some examples, operation 810 may also include the digital asset tracking system receiving more than one digital media assets.)
initiating one or more processes comprises presenting the media files on the computing device (Speasl ¶0031, Once the data is in the internet/cloud system 220, the data may be accessible through a web portal 240 via computing devices 230. This web portal 240 may include image-editing tools, worldwide access, and collaboration mechanisms available to other relevant individuals. Speasl ¶0032, FIG. 3 illustrates an exemplary web portal display that may be used to view the digital media asset and the data associated with the digital media asset stored in the secure server and modify the digital media asset. This description of the digital media can include information such as an identification and/or contact information of the owners of the computing devices of each iterations of the digital media, the description of the digital media or event, GPS location of the digital media asset capture, existence of iterations of the digital media asset, identification and/or contact information of subsequent users who modified the original certified digital media asset, and description or extent to which each iteration modified the original digital media asset. )
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to have modify Lee and Speasl combination with Speasl’s additional teaching. One of ordinary skills in the art would have been motivated in order to provide a system capable of processing and displaying multiple types of media files, rather than being limited to a single media type.
Furthermore, the claimed limitation “the digital content comprises a plurality of media files” is non-functional material that does not move to distinguish over prior art as it does not affect the recited steps in claim 1.
Similarly, the claim limitation “initiating one or more processes comprises presenting the media files on a computing device” consists entirely of language disclosing an intended result, which imparts neither structure nor functionality to the claimed method, so it is considered but given no patentable weight. (see MPEP 2111.05, MPEP 2114 and authorities cited therein). The reference is provided for the purpose of compact prosecution.
Regarding claim 5, Lee and Speasl disclose each and every element of claim 4. Speasl further teaches:
the one or more processes further comprise storing metadata associated with the digital content in the database. (Speasl ¶0025, In other words, the operations 100 of FIG. 1 illustrate data integrity precautions that can be taken. For example, all data (e.g., media asset and/or additional data and/or metadata) can, in some embodiments, be secured in a local database with a globally unique identifier to ensure its integrity. Speasl ¶0026, The computing device also generates and/or extracts metadata (e.g., EXIF metadata) corresponding to the digital media asset, for example identifying the digital media capture device, a timestamp of capture, a date of capture, an author or owner of the computing device, and any other metadata.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to have modify Lee and Speasl combination with Speasl’s additional teaching. One of ordinary skills in the art would have been motivated in order to be able to manage the digital content in an effective manner. It is common and well known in the art to store metadata related to the digital content in a database in order to enable efficient content management and identification.
Regarding claims 6 and 18, Lee and Speasl disclose each and every element of claim 1. Speasl further teaches:
initiating one or more processes comprises initiating an electronic transaction involving a digital asset of the at least one digital asset, the electronic transaction initiated according to a corresponding protocol of the plurality of protocols. (Speasl ¶0037, Each block includes a block header 510/540/570 and a payload 530/560/590. The payload may include one or more payload elements, such as transactions, smart contracts (e.g., executable code), and/or tokens (e.g., non-fungible tokens). The payload elements may be used to identify iterations of a digital media asset, modifications to the digital media asset, annotations made to the digital media asset, ownership of the digital media asset, transfer of ownership of the digital media asset from a first owner to a second owner, fungibility of the digital media asset, price of the digital media asset, rental of the digital asset from an owner for a limited period of time and/or with limitations on types of permissible use, metadata associated with any of the previously-listed content, or combinations thereof. In some examples, a payload element may include a copy of the digital media asset. In some examples, a payload element may include a pointer, such as a uniform resource identifier (URI) or uniform resource locator (URL), to a copy of the digital media asset that is stored in a data structure off of the distributed ledger. Examples of the data structure include a database, a distributed hash table (DHT), an InterPlanetary File System (IPFS), a tree, a hash table, or a combination thereof. Speasl ¶0068, The memory 920, mass storage device 930, or portable storage 940 may in some cases store sensitive information, such as transaction information, health information, or cryptographic keys, and may in some cases encrypt or decrypt such information with the aid of the processor 910.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to have modify Lee and Speasl combination with Speasl’s additional teaching. Initiating a transaction according to a corresponding protocol represents a predictable and well-known practice for handling digital assets in a system.
Regarding claims 7 and 19, Lee and Speasl disclose each and every element of claim 1. Speasl further teaches:
initiating the electronic transaction comprises initiating an update of the electronically distributed ledger according to the corresponding protocol (Speasl ¶0006, The method and the system includes storing the distributed ledger associated with an authenticated digital media asset in a secure server, the distributed ledger including a plurality of blocks. The method and the system also includes generating a new block in response to receiving a new iteration of the authenticated digital media asset, wherein the new block includes one or more iterations identifying one or more changes in the authenticated digital media asset, wherein the new block includes a new block header that includes a hash of a prior block of the distributed ledger. The new block is appended to the plurality of blocks in the distributed ledger, updating the distributed ledger. The updated distributed ledger is stored in all the devices that are related to the authenticated digital media asset and its iterations. Speasl ¶0056, At operation 830, the digital asset tracking system generates the new block, wherein the new block comprises at least the new block header and one or more iterations corresponding to one or more changes in the digital media asset. Such changes may include, for example, changing the background of the digital media asset, removing or adding an object or a person in the digital media, altering colors of the digital media asset, altering the metadata associated with the digital media asset, such as the date and location of the capture of the digital media asset, overlaying or splicing another digital media on the digital media asset, removing or cropping parts of the digital media asset, or otherwise contributing to any change in pixels of the digital media asset, or combinations thereof. Thus, the changes to the digital media asset may be to one or more portions of the digital media asset.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to have modify Lee and Speasl combination with Speasl’s additional teaching. One of ordinary skills in the art would have been motivated in order to maintain a traceable record and history of transactions related to the digital asset.
Claims 4, 8, 17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee and Speasl as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Stanke (US 20060179033 A1).
Regarding claims 4 and 17, the combination of Lee and Speasl disclose each and every element of claim 1. The combination does not disclose, however Stanke teaches:
presenting a list of the digital content on the computing device; (Stanke ¶0024, FIG. 3 shows an example of a screen display that could be presented to a user, based on search parameters entered by the user. For example, a user might indicate that he wants to search for a digital asset. Possibly after one or more preceding displays (such as a log-on screen), the display of FIG. 3 may be presented to the user. The display shows a list of asset (document) types. Each list item (e.g., "Product Images" or "Customer logos") represents a root node in a hierarchical tree structure. Stanke ¶0038, In particular, the navigating may be performed to access a particular digital asset or assets. The digital asset management application 240 may ultimately generate and present a results list of one or more digital assets (block 703).)
receiving input indicative of a selection of listed digital content; and retrieving the selected digital content according to the at least one of the plurality of protocols. (Stanke ¶0030, Returning now to FIG. 5, a number of operations may be possible with a results list. For example, a user may be able to navigate to a detail view of a listed asset by clicking on a field such as box 501, download an asset on the list by clicking a field such as box 502, mark assets via a checkbox 503, add an asset or assets to a "shopping cart" (box 504), delete an asset (box 505), subscribe to an asset (box 506) (a subscriber may receive notification, via email e.g., when an asset changes) or add an asset to a "favorites" list (box 507). An asset may include a thumbnail picture 508 and a property, such as a file type 509. Stanke ¶0031, FIG. 6 shows an example of a shopping cart. A shopping cart in this context is a data container for selected assets. Shopping cart entries may include an asset report 601 that comprises such information about an asset as a file name and type, a creator of the asset and a create time, a version status (e.g. latest or acitve), a security status (e.g., access to the asset is public), a last-modified time, an identifier of the modifier, and the like. Stanke ¶0032, Options further provided from the shopping cart may include selecting or de-selecting assets (boxes 602 and 603), converting an asset to a different file type (box 604), removing an asset from the shopping cart (box 605), and downloading selected assets (box 606). When an asset is downloaded, the asset report 601 may be downloaded along with the asset. The asset report 601 may further include hyperlinks (not shown) to downloaded assets. Additionally, the asset report is fully customizable via XSLT Style Sheets.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to have modify the combination of Lee and Speasl with Stanke’s teaching. One of ordinary skills in the art would have been motivated in order to improve user experience and accessibility to the stored data.
Regarding claims 8 and 20, the combination of Lee and Speasl disclose each and every element of claim 1. The combination does not disclose, however Stanke teaches:
determining the data further comprises: determining whether the data is indicative of an additional digital asset comprising additional digital content and has been formatted according to a different protocol than the at least one of the plurality of protocols, wherein the additional digital content has been identified via a second resource identifier (Stanke ¶0029, As noted earlier, the same digital asset may belong to multiple different hierarchies, depending upon whether its properties fit to a given set of classifications of a hierarchy. However, the path to the digital asset may be different for each hierarchy. For example, one or more of the digital assets shown in FIG. 5 might have also been reached if the user had selected "Product Images" instead of "Customer Logos" as the root node. However, the path may have included a different series of nodes and corresponding displays, because of the way the nodes of the "Product Images" hierarchy were classified when this hierarchy was built. Thus, according to embodiments of the present invention, among other properties of a digital asset there may be a plurality of "path" properties. Each path property may identify all the levels of a given hierarchy that must be navigated in order to reach a results list.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to have modify the combination of Lee and Speasl with Stanke’s teaching. One of ordinary skills in the art would have been motivated in order to ensure correct processing of any additional assets existing in the system that are formatted according to a different protocol.
Response to Arguments
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. § 101
The applicant presents three assertions, i.e., “the claims do not recite limitations group within the certain methods of organizing human behavior grouping of abstract ideas”, “the claims as a whole integrates the method into a practical application. Specifically, the additional elements recite a specific improvement over prior art systems by allowing for secure communications between a computing device and a database to facilitate digital asset management, including access to the database by way of a digital wallet holding at least one token for at least one digital asset. Digital content formatted according to one of a plurality of protocols may be located and made available to one or more devices, applications, services, etc. and one or more processes may be initiated.” and “the claims amount to significantly more than the judicial exception”. The basis of these assertions are based on the applicant’s argument on pages 8-13.
Regarding the applicant’s assertion that “the claims do not recite limitations group within the certain methods of organizing human behavior grouping of abstract ideas”. The examiner respectfully disagrees. The examiner maintains that the claims remain directed to an abstract idea, specifically directed toward certain methods of organizing human activity (i.e., fundamental economic principles). The abstract idea described in the claims belongs to the group of fundamental economic principles because it focus on accessing and retrieving asset data, distributing the asset data and initiating other actions based on the data. As per MPEP 2106.04(a), in step 2A prong one to determine whether a claim recites an abstract idea, the specific limitations in the claim under examination must be identified and analyzed to determine whether they fall within at least one of the recognize groupings of abstract ideas. If one of the limitations in the examined claim falls within one of the groups, it is reasonable to conclude that the claims recite an abstract idea and the examination continues to step 2A prong two.
Regarding the applicant’s assertion that “the claims as a whole integrates the method into a practical application. Specifically, the additional elements recite a specific improvement over prior art systems by allowing for secure communications between a computing device and a database to facilitate digital asset management, including access to the database by way of a digital wallet holding at least one token for at least one digital asset. Digital content formatted according to one of a plurality of protocols may be located and made available to one or more devices, applications, services, etc. and one or more processes may be initiated”. The examiner finds it not persuasive and respectfully disagrees. Under step 2 prong two, the issue is whether the additional elements integrate the recited abstract idea into a practical application. In the amended claim, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The additional elements (cryptographically secure communication link, accessing a database via a digital wallet identifier, handling protocol formatted data and making data accessible to applications) are described as a high level of generality. The claim does not recite a specific improvement to cryptography, the network, database or wallet technology. Rather it merely uses generic computer components as a tool to perform the abstract idea. Therefore, the claim does not recite any technological advancement or inventive integration beyond applying these tools to an abstract concept and thus fail to impose any meaningful limit that would transform the abstract idea into a practical application under the second prong of step 2A of the subject matter eligibility framework.
Regarding the applicant’s assertion that “the claims amount to significantly more than the judicial exception”, are also not persuasive. The claim invention pertains to a method for processing input to identify, retrieve and use asset data from a database and enabling further processes based on the data of fundamental economic principles or practices. Further, the additional elements of a database, a mobile application, a distributed application, an online exchange, a content creator, a web-based service, an electronically distributed ledger, a web browser, a program to facilitate online transactions, a computing device and a cryptographically secure communications link, as recited in the claim, are merely additional elements representing conventional computer technologies employed to apply the underlying abstract idea. To meet the requirements for patent eligibility, the claim must do more than simply apply this abstract idea using generic technological tools. Therefore, the recited claim, does not include any additional features that rise to the level of an inventive concept under step 2B of the subject matter eligibility framework.
As such the claims remain within an abstract idea and rejection is maintained based on the
newly amended claims.
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. § 103
Applicant submits remarks and arguments geared toward the amendments. Examiner has carefully reviewed and considered Applicant’s remarks, however they ARE MOOT in light of the fact that they are geared towards the newly added claimed expression in the amendments.
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.
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2006/0218148 A1 to Weber et al. discloses: The disclosure relates to a digital asset storage, search and retrieval system. Each digital asset may comprise one or more versions and properties. The system may access stored digital assets using hierarchical classifications under a taxonomy based on the properties. The digital assets may be assigned conditions governing usage of the assets. Via relationship networks, the digital assets may "inherit" the conditions from other digital assets.
US 2024/0428242 A1 to Marsh discloses: A computer-implemented method comprising receiving a request from a computer of a first of a first computing environment to execute a network operation transferring network operation data from the first data structure to a second data structure associated with a second computing device of a second computing environment; identifying, from a hierarchical model indicating relationships between data structures maintained through a blockchain, a third data structure of a third computing device in communication with the plurality of nodes maintaining the blockchain; retrieving at least one condition corresponding to the third data structure from the blockchain; determining the network operation data satisfies the at least one condition; and appending a first record to a second record of the blockchain.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JANICE LOZA whose telephone number is (571)270-3979. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30am - 5:00pm.
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.
/J.L./
Examiner, Art Unit 3698
/STEVEN S KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3698