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 .
Acknowledgements
This Office Action is in response to the claims originally filed on 01/02/2024.
Claims 1-20 were newly introduced.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claims 1-20 were examined.
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 1-5, 8-16 , 19 and 20 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gagne-Keats et al. (US 2023/0237483 A1), hereinafter Gagne-Keats, in view of Chalkley et al. (US 2023/0088936 A1), hereinafter Chalkley and in view of Gillis et al. (US 2023/0372830 A1), hereinafter Gillis.
With respect to claims 1, 12 and 20, Gagne-Keats teaches an apparatus for generating a metaverse asset based on securing a physical object; a computer program product (see Fig. 2, paragraph [0024]); and a method for generating a metaverse asset based on securing a physical object (Digital non-fungible assets in persistent virtual environments linked to real assets) comprising:
authenticating, by metaverse interface circuitry, a user to a metaverse instance using metaverse credentials (Claims 1 and 20) / metaverse interface circuitry configured to authenticate a user to a metaverse instance using metaverse credentials (Claim 12) (see metaverse account, account identifier, paragraph [0034]);
a metaverse representation of the physical object (see paragraph [0036]: “The system may display a virtual object is linked to the NFT that represents the non-fungible physical asset such that the virtual object in the metaverse is anchored to a non-fungible physical object via the NFT. In particular, system 200 may display a virtual object that is linked to NFT 203 and represents non-fungible physical asset 202 to a user at the metaverse access point 212. In some embodiments, the virtual object depicts an appearance of the non-fungible physical asset (e.g., non-fungible physical asset 202). In some embodiments, the virtual object depicts a physical or virtual asset other than the non-fungible physical asset (e.g., non-fungible physical asset 202).”);
broadcasting, by the metaverse interface circuitry, minting of a metaverse asset to the metaverse instance, wherein the metaverse asset comprises a link to the metaverse representation of the physical object (Claims 1 and 20)/ broadcast ownership of the metaverse asset to the metaverse instance, wherein the ownership is associated with the metaverse credentials (Claim 12) (see paragraph [0035]: “The system may store the NFT and accompanying metadata on a blockchain thereby creating a link between the NFT and the non-fungible physical asset in a metaverse. In particular, system 200 may store NFT 203 and accompanying metadata on blockchain 208. In some embodiments, accompanying metadata may include a timestamp when a user acquired the non-fungible physical asset (e.g., non-fungible physical asset 202).”; Fig. 3, 302, paragraph [0041]: “FIG. 3 is a flowchart that illustrates a method for managing digital non-fungible assets in persistent virtual environments linked to non-fungible physical assets. At 302, the system 300 generates an NFT that represents a unique identifier of a real asset (e.g., non-fungible physical asset). At 304, the NFT is stored on a blockchain. The NFT can be stored on the blockchain as public evidence of ownership of the non-fungible physical asset. In one example, accompanying data (e.g., metadata) can be stored along with the NFT on the blockchain. The NFT-related data (NFT and metadata) enables verifying ownership of the non-fungible physical asset in a metaverse...");
broadcasting, by the metaverse interface circuitry, ownership of the metaverse asset to the metaverse instance, wherein the ownership is associated with the metaverse credentials (Claims 1 and 20) / broadcast minting of a metaverse asset to the metaverse instance, wherein the metaverse asset comprises a link to the metaverse representation of the physical object (Claim 12) (see Fig. 3, 306, paragraph [0041]: “...At 306, the metaverse allows a display of a virtual object indicative of the non-fungible physical asset. The virtual object is linked to the NFT that represents the non-fungible physical asset such that the virtual object in the metaverse is anchored to the non-fungible physical object in the real world. At 306, a user can verify whether another user owns the non-fungible physical asset in the metaverse based on the NFT showing ownership.”; paragraph [0042]: “The NFT is a tradable asset that provides a linkage between digital and physical objects and can act as an authentication factor in the metaverse. That is, the NFT can act as an authentication factor used for verifying who owns an asset in the real world..."); and
providing, by the account transaction circuitry and to the transaction server... an indication of broadcasting ownership of the metaverse asset (Claims 1 and 20) / wherein the account transaction circuitry is further configured to provide, to the transaction server... an indication of broadcasting ownership of the metaverse asset (Claim 12) (see paragraph [0033]: “The system may generate an NFT that represents a non-fungible physical asset. In particular, system 200 may generate NFT 203 that represents non-fungible physical asset 202. In some embodiments, system 200 may receive an asset identifier corresponding to the non-fungible physical asset. System 200 may determine a device identifier associated with a user device. System 200 may generate, using an on-chain program, the NFT (e.g., NFT 203) assigned to the device identifier. The NFT (e.g., NFT 203) may include metadata including the asset identifier. The asset identifier may include a unique identifier corresponding to the non-fungible physical asset (e.g., non-fungible physical asset 202). The asset identifier may verify the ownership of the non-fungible physical asset (e.g., non-fungible physical asset 202).”).
Gagne-Keats does not explicitly disclose a method, apparatus and product comprising: authenticating, by account transaction circuitry, the user to a transaction server using transaction server credentials (Claims 1 and 20) / account transaction circuitry configured to authenticate the user to a transaction server using transaction server credentials (Claim 12); securing, within an electronically locked secure volume, a physical object (Claims 1 and 20) / an electronically locked secure volume used to secure a physical object (Claim 12); scanning, by sensor hardware, the physical object, wherein scanning the physical object generates scanned object raw data (Claims 1 and 20) / sensor hardware configured to scan the physical object, wherein scanning the physical object generates scanned object raw data (Claim 12); generating, by the metaverse interface circuitry and based on the scanned object raw data, a metaverse representation of the physical object (Claims 1 and 20) / wherein the metaverse interface circuitry is further configured to: generate, based on the scanned object raw data, a metaverse representation of the physical object (Claim 12); providing, by the account transaction circuitry and to the transaction server, an indication of securing the physical object... (Claims 1 and 20) / wherein the account transaction circuitry is further configured to provide, to the transaction server, an indication of securing the physical object... (Claim 12).
However, Chalkley discloses a method, apparatus and product (Physical storage vault for physical items of digital twin NFTs) comprising:
securing, within an electronically locked secure volume, a physical object (Claims 1 and 20) / an electronically locked secure volume used to secure a physical object (Claim 12) (see Fig. 1, storage vault 140 , paragraphs [0017]; [0033]: “The illustrated environment 100 also includes physical storage vault 140, which may be utilized in one or more implementations, e.g., to store physical items having digital twinned NFTs for safe keeping..."; paragraph [0041]: “Optionally, the service provider system 104 may store physical items at the physical storage vault 140, such as valuable physical items having digital twin NFTs. Storage of the underlying physical item at the physical storage vault 140 allows ownership of the digital twin NFT and the physical item to be easily transferred between owners without the hassle of physically moving the item to transfer possession, e.g., shipping the item or exchanging it between hands. Instead, the item may be transferred to the physical storage vault 140 for storage and remain in the physical storage vault 140 while ownership of the physical item and/or its digital twin NFT is transferred a number of times. The physical storage vault 140 may also maintain physical items where ownership is divided, using a digital twin NFT, into a number of fractions of ownership of the physical item, e.g., “shares” of the physical item issued according to terms of the digital twin NFT.”);
scanning, by sensor hardware, the physical object, wherein scanning the physical object generates scanned object raw data (Claims 1 and 20) / sensor hardware configured to scan the physical object, wherein scanning the physical object generates scanned object raw data (Claim 12) (see Fig. 1, fingerprint capture system 130, paragraph [0038]: “The fingerprint capture system 130 is configured to generate digital fingerprints of physical items that uniquely identify a given physical item from other physical items. The fingerprint capture system 130 generates those fingerprints based on captured features of the physical items, such as features captured using sensors of one or more devices. As discussed below, the features may be captured using one or more sensors of client devices (e.g., the client devices 106, 108), one or more sensors of the fingerprint capture system 130 (e.g., when configured with hardware to capture the features of physical devices), and/or sensors of other devices. By way of example, the client devices and/or the fingerprint capture system 130 may include a high-resolution digital camera to capture high-resolution digital image features of physical items.”);
generating, by the metaverse interface circuitry and based on the scanned object raw data, a metaverse representation of the physical object (Claims 1 and 20) / wherein the metaverse interface circuitry is further configured to: generate, based on the scanned object raw data, a metaverse representation of the physical object (Claim 12) (see Fig. 2, digital content 214, paragraph [0036]: "...digital content of the physical item (e.g., an image of the physical item for presentation, a video of the physical item, and/or a 3D model of the physical item).."; paragraph [0056]: “Here, the digital twin NFT 210 is depicted including the fingerprint 206 and the physical item digital content 214..."; paragraph [0076]: “In one or more implementations, transferring ownership of the NFT 302 to the user account provides access by the user account to a digital asset of the NFT 302, such as digital artwork. Examples of digital content which may be configured as digital assets include, but are not limited to, digital images, digital videos, in-game content, AR/VR content, text, 3D-models, compositions of multiple types of digital content, and digital trading cards, to name just a few. As discussed in relation to FIG. 2, such a digital asset may be encoded in the NFT 302 or an association with the digital asset (e.g., an identifier of the digital asset or a location of the digital asset (URL)) may be encoded in the NFT 302.”; Fig. 3, vault management system 314, paragraph [0079]: “The management carried out by the vault management system 314 may include, for example, obtaining physical items for storage in the vault, maintaining physical items stored in the vault, capturing and providing information about the physical items stored in the vault (e.g., videos or images) to owners of the physical items...");
providing, by the account transaction circuitry and to the transaction server, an indication of securing the physical object... (Claims 1 and 20) / wherein the account transaction circuitry is further configured to provide, to the transaction server, an indication of securing the physical object... (Claim 12) (see paragraph [0078]: “To cause the physical item 304 to be stored in the physical storage vault 140 the listing platform 134 issues storage instructions 312. The illustrated example 300 includes vault management system 314, which is configured to manage storage of physical items in the vault. The vault management system 314 may be included as part of the service provider system 104 in one or more implementations. Thus, the service provider system 104 (or one or more of its other components) may carry out the functionality of the vault management system 314 as discussed below. Alternatively, a portion or an entirety of the vault management system 314 may be operated by a third-party that interacts with one or more systems of the service provider system 104, such as with the listing platform 134.”; see also paragraph [0114]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the physical storage vault for physical items of digital twin NFTs as disclosed by Chalkley in the method, apparatus and product of Gagne-Keats, the motivation being to use NFTs in connection with physical items, in which the NFT provides proof of ownership of a physical item, while keeping the physical item safely and securely stored in the physical storage vault (see Chalkley, paragraphs [0001] and [0017]).
The combination of Gagne-Keats and Chalkley does not explicitly disclose a method, apparatus and product comprising: authenticating, by account transaction circuitry, the user to a transaction server using transaction server credentials (Claims 1 and 20) / account transaction circuitry configured to authenticate the user to a transaction server using transaction server credentials (Claim 12).
However, Gillis discloses a method, apparatus and product (Apparatus and methods for simulating authentication within the metaverse) comprising:
authenticating, by account transaction circuitry, the user to a transaction server using transaction server credentials (Claims 1 and 20) / account transaction circuitry configured to authenticate the user to a transaction server using transaction server credentials (Claim 12) (see paragraph [0028]: “The authentication computer program product may receive a request to authenticate the user from the user. The user may transmit the request from any suitable computer, such as a smartphone, a mobile device, a virtual reality/augmented reality headset, a desktop computer, a laptop computer, or other computer system. The user may transmit the request when the user desires to be authenticated within the metaverse, e.g., when the user plans on performing a financial transaction within the metaverse. In an embodiment, the user may transmit the request as a pre-requisite to joining a session within the metaverse (i.e., as part of a login procedure).”; paragraph [0029]: “The program may determine the request is a legitimate request by authenticating the user. If the program cannot authenticate the user, the request will be treated as illegitimate, and the user may not be authenticated. The program may authenticate the user through one or more methods, discussed infra. Other suitable authentication methods may be used, such as one-time passwords, passwords, multi-facto authentication, PINs, biometric attributes, and any other suitable authentication method.” See also paragraphs [0034]-[0038] for details on determining the legitimacy of an authentication request).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the providing authentication services within the metaverse as disclosed by Gillis in the method, apparatus and product of Gagne-Keats and Chalkley, the motivation being to allow for securely expanded services within the metaverse (see Gillis, paragraph [0007]).
With respect to claims 2 and 13, the combination of Gagne-Keats, Chalkley and Gillis teaches all the subject matter of the method and apparatus as described above with respect to claims 1 and 12. Furthermore, Chalkley discloses a method and apparatus wherein the sensor hardware comprises an automatic identification and data capture (AIDC) sensor device, wherein scanning the physical object comprises detecting, by the AIDC sensor device, an AIDC identifier from the physical object (see paragraph [0038]: “The fingerprint capture system 130 is configured to generate digital fingerprints of physical items that uniquely identify a given physical item from other physical items. The fingerprint capture system 130 generates those fingerprints based on captured features of the physical items, such as features captured using sensors of one or more devices. As discussed below, the features may be captured using one or more sensors of client devices (e.g., the client devices 106, 108), one or more sensors of the fingerprint capture system 130 (e.g., when configured with hardware to capture the features of physical devices), and/or sensors of other devices. By way of example, the client devices and/or the fingerprint capture system 130 may include a high-resolution digital camera to capture high-resolution digital image features of physical items.”; paragraph [0048]: “Examples of sensors that may be used to generate the sensor-captured features 202 include, but are not limited to, imaging sensors (e.g., one or more high-resolution digital cameras, one or more low-resolution digital cameras), temperature sensors, LIDAR, biochemical sensors, and so on. Examples of the sensor-captured features 202 may include, but are not limited to, images (e.g., high-resolution images of the physical item 204's features), videos of the physical item 204, data derived from various electromagnetic spectrum features captured by the sensors about the physical item 204, measured temperatures at different locations of the physical item 204 (or a map of them), a LIDAR scan of the physical item 204, or measurements (or estimated values) of one or more elements or compounds at different locations of the physical item 204, to name just a few. It is to be appreciated that the sensor-captured features 202 may be produced by a variety of sensors of different devices and describe a variety of features about the physical item 204 without departing from the spirit or scope of the techniques described herein.”; see also QR-code applied to item, paragraph [0066]). The motivation for combining the references remain unaltered from the motivation described above in conjunction with the rejection of the independent claims.
With respect to claims 3 and 14, the combination of Gagne-Keats, Chalkley and Gillis teaches all the subject matter of the method and apparatus as described above with respect to claims 1 and 12. Furthermore, Chalkley discloses a method and apparatus further comprising:
providing, by the account transaction circuitry, the scanned object raw data to the transaction server (see paragraph [0079]: “…capturing and providing information about the physical items stored in the vault (e.g., videos or images) to owners of the physical items…"); and
receiving, by the account transaction circuitry and from the transaction server, details of a financial offer, wherein the financial offer is based on a monetary value of the physical object (see Fig. 4, combined listing 402 paragraph [0099]: “The combined listing title 404 indicates that the combined listing 402 is for both the “Luxury Watch and NFT”, and the image 406 corresponds to an image of the luxury watch. In some cases, the image 406 may correspond to digital content of the NFT itself. The authenticity indicator 408 indicates that the physical item has been verified as being authentic by the authentication service system 132. The price 410, in this example, is shown as 25 ETH which indicates that the user can obtain the combined listing for 25 ETH (which corresponds to $75,000 US Dollars based on a current valuation of 1 ETH being worth $3,000 US Dollars). The combined listing description 412 includes a description of the combined listing, and can be expanded in some cases to view additional information regarding the combined listing.”). Regarding the BRI of the claims, Examiner notes that claims 3 and 14 recite “wherein the financial offer is based on a monetary value of the physical object”, language directed to non-functional descriptive material. See MPEP 2111.05. The motivation for combining the references remain unaltered from the motivation described above in conjunction with the rejection of the independent claims.
With respect to claims 4 and 15, the combination of Gagne-Keats, Chalkley and Gillis teaches all the subject matter of the method and apparatus as described above with respect to claims 1 and 12. Furthermore, Gagne-Keats discloses a method and apparatus wherein the metaverse asset comprises a non-fungible token (NFT) (see paragraph [0036]: “The system may display a virtual object is linked to the NFT that represents the non-fungible physical asset such that the virtual object in the metaverse is anchored to a non-fungible physical object via the NFT. In particular, system 200 may display a virtual object that is linked to NFT 203 and represents non-fungible physical asset 202 to a user at the metaverse access point 212. In some embodiments, the virtual object depicts an appearance of the non-fungible physical asset (e.g., non-fungible physical asset 202). In some embodiments, the virtual object depicts a physical or virtual asset other than the non-fungible physical asset (e.g., non-fungible physical asset 202).”;). Regarding the BRI of the claims, Examiner notes that claims 4 and 15 recite “wherein the metaverse asset comprises a non-fungible token (NFT)”, language directed to non-functional descriptive material. The motivation for combining the references remain unaltered from the motivation described above in conjunction with the rejection of the independent claims.
With respect to claims 5 and 16, the combination of Gagne-Keats, Chalkley and Gillis teaches all the subject matter of the method and apparatus as described above with respect to claims 4 and 15. Furthermore, Gagne-Keats discloses a method and apparatus broadcasting, by the metaverse interface circuitry and to the metaverse instance, an indication of a transaction of the NFT (see paragraph [0040]: “In some embodiments, the user may sell the non-fungible physical asset. In particular, system 200 may receive, from a user device, a request to remove the virtual object. The request may include an NFT identifier linked to the virtual object, an asset identifier, and a timestamp of a sale. System 200 may verify the non-fungible physical asset (e.g., non-fungible physical asset 202) has been updated. System 200 may store, on the blockchain (e.g., blockchain 208), the NFT (e.g., NFT 203), and the accompanying metadata. The accompanying metadata may include a new timestamp. System 200 may remove the virtual object in the metaverse.”;). Regarding the BRI of the claims, Examiner notes that claims 5 and 16 recite “an indication of a transaction of the NFT”, language directed to non-functional descriptive material. The motivation for combining the references remain unaltered from the motivation described above in conjunction with the rejection of the independent claims.
With respect to claims 8 and 19, the combination of Gagne-Keats, Chalkley and Gillis teaches all the subject matter of the method and apparatus as described above with respect to claims 1 and 12. Furthermore, Chalkley discloses a method and apparatus further comprising
identifying, by the sensor hardware, the physical object within the electronically locked secure volume (see condition of the item, paragraph [0060]: “In this way, a condition of the physical item 204 may be encoded separately from data that uniquely identifies the physical item 204 from other physical items, e.g., separately from the fingerprint 206. Due to this separate determination and encoding, the condition encoded by the digital twin NFT 210 may change over time, but the fingerprint 206 of the item does not change over time..."; paragraph [0066]: “In one or more implementations, the minting system 128 causes the digital twin NFT 210 to encode features received based on user input of the listing user account (e.g., the selling user account) in connection with generating a listing for the physical item 204 on the listing platform 134. The user-input features which the minting system 128 can encode in the digital twin NFT 210 include, for example, a description of the item, one or more categories corresponding to the item, sale price, condition, shipping information, information about the owner, and so forth. In this way, the digital twin NFT 210 may encode a variety of information about the physical item 204. Additionally, each time the digital twin NFT 210 is transferred to a different owner, e.g., responsive to the transfer to different digital wallet addresses, transfer information is also encoded in the digital twin NFT 210.); and
providing, by the account transaction circuitry, a status of the physical object to the transaction server (see paragraph [0060]: “...By way of example, the digital twin NFT 210 may encode an association with metadata that describes a condition of the item in terms of “new” or “used,” an amount the item is used, a relative amount of use compared to other items, an age of the item, and/or changes to the item from one or more previous times features of the item were captured, to name just a few. Consider a scenario, after the digital twin NFT 210 is minted, in which additional features of the physical item 204 are captured e.g., by sensors of one or more devices. The service provider system 104 is configured to compare the newly captured features to the sensor-captured features 202 used in connection with minting the digital twin NFT 210. Based on this comparison, the service provider system 104 may determine that the condition of the physical item 204 has changed subsequent to minting the digital twin NFT 210. Based on determining that the condition of the physical item 204 has changed over time, the service provider system 104 may update the metadata of the digital twin NFT 210 to indicate the changed condition of the physical item 204...”). The motivation for combining the references remain unaltered from the motivation described above in conjunction with the rejection of the independent claims.
With respect to claim 9, the combination of Gagne-Keats, Chalkley and Gillis teaches all the subject matter of the method as described above with respect to claim 1. Furthermore, Chalkley discloses a method wherein the metaverse asset further comprises a smart contract (see paragraph [0065]: “As also mentioned above, the minting system 128 can mint NFTs so that they encode smart contracts with various terms (e.g., royalties and/or fractional ownership structures and rules) to govern transactions involving an NFT, to initiate execution of smart contracts encoded by NFTs, and so forth. In connection with use of the minting system 128, after a transaction (e.g., sale) has occurred, the minting system 128 can also encode such smart contracts into those NFTs. In addition to smart contracts, the minting system 128 can cause other features of, or associated with, the physical item 204 to be encoded in the digital twin NFT 210. By way of example, the minting system 128 can encode in the digital twin NFT 210 one or more of visual data (e.g., images, videos, and/or references to visual data) of the physical item 204, data derived from such visual data, data describing a location of the physical item 204 at different times (e.g., at a timestamp), maintenance data, data describing updates or upgrades of the item (e.g., addition of new, upgraded, or downgraded parts), authenticity data (e.g., indicating whether the physical item 204 an authentic physical item), vintage data, and tampering data, to name just a few.”). Regarding the BRI of the claim, Examiner notes that claim 9 recites “wherein the metaverse asset further comprises a smart contract”, language directed to non-functional descriptive material. See MPEP 2111.05. The motivation for combining the references remain unaltered from the motivation described above in conjunction with the rejection of the independent claims.
With respect to claim 10, the combination of Gagne-Keats, Chalkley and Gillis teaches all the subject matter of the method as described above with respect to claim 9. Furthermore, Chalkley discloses a method further comprising: in an instance in which the physical object is not detected by the sensor hardware, causing, by the metaverse interface circuitry, the metaverse asset to become inactive based on the smart contract (see paragraph [0058]: “The digital twin NFT 210 may be minted to encode other data, examples of which include smart contracts (e.g., to govern royalties, fractional ownership processes and events, end-of-life of the NFT events, and so forth), description of other aspects of the physical item 204 (e.g., a condition of the physical item 204, provenance of different parts of the physical item 204, maintenance record of the physical item 204, and so forth)..."; paragraph [0086]: “In addition to causing the physical item 304 to be shipped to the loaner location 316, the vault management system 314 may also cause the NFT 302 to be updated on the blockchain 116 to encode the changes in location, e.g., so that a record of the physical item 304's location is encoded by the NFT 302 on the blockchain 116. By way of example, the vault management system 314 may issue instructions to one or more of the nodes 112 describing a transaction involving a transfer of location of the physical item 304. These instructions may be configured by the vault management system 314 according to the token standard. The vault management system 314 may issue such instructions for each location transfer of the physical item 304 to maintain a provenance of the physical item 304, in terms of its location in addition to ownership.”). Regarding the BRI of the claim, Examiner notes that claim 10 recites “in an instance in which the physical object is not detected by the sensor hardware, causing, by the metaverse interface circuitry, the metaverse asset to become inactive based on the smart contract.”, language directed to contingent limitations. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met. See Ex parte Schulhauser, Appeal 2013-007847 (PTAB April 28, 2016) (precedential) for an analysis of contingent claim limitations in the context of both method claims and system claims. See also MPEP 2111.04. The motivation for combining the references remain unaltered from the motivation described above in conjunction with the rejection of the independent claims.
With respect to claim 11, the combination of Gagne-Keats, Chalkley and Gillis teaches all the subject matter of the method as described above with respect to claim 9. Furthermore, Chalkley discloses a method wherein a second physical item is related to a second scanned object raw data, wherein a measure of similarity of the scanned object raw data and the second scanned object raw data is determined to be within a pre-determined threshold, the method further comprising: in an instance in which a second physical item is detected, causing the metaverse asset to become inactive based on the smart contract (see identifying authentic items vs. knockoffs, paragraph [0051]: “Broadly, the authentication service system 132 verifies that the physical item 204 corresponds to an authentic physical item. To do so, the authentication service system 132 compares the fingerprint 206 to the distinguishing feature data 138 stored in the storage 136. The distinguishing feature data 138 describes features of one or more physical items that are known to be authentic and is saved in the storage 136. The authentication service system 132 is capable through a computerized comparison of the digital fingerprint 206 and the distinguishing feature data 138 of identifying those authentic items and/or differentiating them from items that are not authentic (e.g., knockoffs). Some of the comparison techniques used by the authentication service system 132 may not be possible by humans because humans do not have the sensory capacity to detect one or more of the same features and/or compare digital fingerprints to the distinguishing feature data 138 at the level required to identify a physical item as authentic.”; paragraph [0052]: “If the authentication service system 132 determines that there is a match between the fingerprint 206 and the distinguishing feature data 138, then the authentication service system 132 determines that the physical item 204 is an authentic physical item. If the authentication service system 132 does not determine that there is a match between the fingerprint 206 and the distinguishing feature data 138, however, then the authentication service system 132 may determine that the physical item 204 is not an authentic physical item. In one or more implementations, the authentication service system 132 may determine that there is a match between the fingerprint 206 and the distinguishing feature data 138 based on identifying a threshold similarity between the fingerprint 206 and the respective distinguishing feature data 138. In this way, a physical item that is not identical to a known authentic item, but is “close enough” to have a high likelihood of being authentic, may be determined authentic by the authentication service system 132, such that the physical item 204 is considered a “match” to authentic physical items.”; paragraph [0053]: “...In the scenario where the authentication service system 132 does not find a suitable match between the fingerprint 206 and the distinguishing feature data 138, the authentication service system 132 may determine that the physical item 204 is not authentic and may communicate a response indicating that the physical item 204 is not authentic, e.g., to the fingerprint capture system 130 or to another component.”). The motivation for combining the references remain unaltered from the motivation described above in conjunction with the rejection of the independent claims.
Claims 6 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gagne-Keats (US 2023/0237483 A1), in view of Chalkley (US 2023/0088936 A1), in view of Gillis (US 2023/0372830 A1), and in view of Remez (US 2024/0267240 A1).
With respect to claims 6 and 17, the combination of Gagne-Keats, Chalkley and Gillis teaches all the subject matter of the method and apparatus as described above with respect to claims 1 and 12. The combination of Gagne-Keats, Chalkley and Gillis does not explicitly teach a method and apparatus wherein the physical object is a cash note, wherein the sensor hardware comprises cash scanning hardware.
However, Remez discloses a method and apparatus (Tool, system and method for performing transactions based on a unique NFT token) wherein the physical object is a cash note, wherein the sensor hardware comprises cash scanning hardware (see paragraph [0027]: “An NFT-copy of a given original physical banknote is a non-fungible, or unique, token that includes digital images of at least both sides of the banknote, as well as information about the attribute values of the original physical banknote. In addition, the NFT-copy has its own attributes intended to verify whether the digital images included in the token meet the predefined requirements, as well as to verify whether the original physical banknote is authentic. These attributes can also include information about persons who are entitled to dispose of this digital copy, and information about the NFT-copy manufacturer, etc.”; paragraph [0032]: “A digital image of the original physical banknote is obtained, for example, by photographing, scanning, video recording of the original banknote by various means of image acquisition, for example, using a camera, video camera, web-camera, scanner, camera built into a smartphone, etc.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the NFT-banknote as disclosed by Remez in the method and apparatus of Gagne-Keats, Chalkley and Gillis, the motivation being to perform settlements in blockchain networks when making transactions of any kind, such as the purchase and sale of goods and/or services, wherein the original physical banknote may be only transferred at the request of a person who receives the specified settlement system upon completion of the transaction (see Remez, paragraph [0011]).
Claims 7 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gagne-Keats (US 2023/0237483 A1), in view of Chalkley (US 2023/0088936 A1), in view of Gillis (US 2023/0372830 A1), and in view of Aspler-Yaskil (US 2023/0370275 A1)
With respect to claims 7 and 18, the combination of Gagne-Keats, Chalkley and Gillis teaches all the subject matter of the method and apparatus as described above with respect to claims 1 and 12. The combination of Gagne-Keats, Chalkley and Gillis does not explicitly teach a method and apparatus wherein generating the metaverse representation of the physical object comprises: generating, by asset creation circuitry, a random seed value; processing, by the asset creation circuitry, the scanned object raw data to generate cleaned scanned object data; and executing, by the asset creation circuitry, a generative asset creation model based on the random seed value and the cleaned scanned object data, wherein executing the generative asset creation model creates the metaverse asset, wherein the metaverse asset is procedurally generated.
However, Aspler-Yaskil discloses a method and apparatus (Verification system for proving authenticity and ownership of digital assets) wherein generating the metaverse representation of the physical object comprises:
generating, by asset creation circuitry, a random seed value (see random number, paragraph [0089]: “In an example, the verification system 155 may generate first key 704 and second key 715 based on the encryption key 703. The encryption key 703 may be generated based on a random number or a random number with a salt based on a hash of the digital asset 702...");
processing, by the asset creation circuitry, the scanned object raw data to generate cleaned scanned object data (see Fig. 10, processing digital asset 702, paragraph [0106]: “FIG. 10 illustrates a flowchart of a method 1000 for authenticating a digital asset 702 using a multi-party key authentication, according to an embodiment. Note that one or more steps, processes, and methods described in steps 1002-1014 of method 1000 may be omitted, performed in a different sequence, or combined as desired or appropriate.”; paragraph [0107]: “At step 1002, the digital asset 702 may be signed using an encryption key 703 associated with the digital asset 702..."); and
executing, by the asset creation circuitry, a generative asset creation model based on the random seed value and the cleaned scanned object data, wherein executing the generative asset creation model creates the metaverse asset, wherein the metaverse asset is procedurally generated (see Fig. 1, signing digital asset using the encrypted key generated by using a random number (seed), paragraph [0107]: “At step 1002, the digital asset 702 may be signed using an encryption key 703 associated with the digital asset 702. The verification system 155 may generate encryption key 703 and sign digital asset 702 with encryption key 703. The encryption key 703 may be a cryptographic key which is generated from a random number when the verification system 155 is provided access to the digital asset 702 stored in, e.g., storage 755. Digital asset 702 may be associated with first entity 110 where first entity 110 may be an author or owner of digital asset 702. Typically, step 1002 may occur when digital asset 702 is created.”; ).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the encryption mechanisms as disclosed by Aspler-Yaskil in the method and apparatus of Gagne-Keats, Chalkley and Gillis, the motivation being to minimize risks for fraudulent transactions involving digital assets conducted through conventional distributed ledger systems (see Aspler-Yaskil, paragraph [0004]). Regarding the BRI of the claims, Examiner notes that claim 7 is a method claim and recites “wherein the metaverse asset is procedurally generated...” language directed to not positively recited method steps.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Non-Patent Literature
Picone et al. (NPL 2023, listed in PTO-892 as page 1, reference "U") disclose Digital Twin & Blockchain: Technology Enablers for Metaverse Computing, including the combination of Digital Twins and Blockchain technologies as strategic pillars for bridging the gap between the virtual and the physical worlds and supporting the creation of the Metaverse.
Patent Literature
Warnick et al. (US 12,260,440 B1) disclose non-fungible token transaction management systems and methods for digital health data, including management techniques that facilitate creation, valuation, authentication, insurance, exchange, and storage of NFTs.
Mazumder et al. (US 2025/0077628 A1) disclose system and method for validating a digital item token on a simulated user device, including a data log of interactions performed by an avatar of a user in a virtual environment, including prior interaction data associated with acquiring one or more digital assets in the virtual environment, such as one or more digital item token. In some embodiments, the digital item token is a non-fungible token (NFT) associated with a digital asset in the virtual environment. The NFT may be associated with any digital asset including, but not limited to, digital currency, digital art, music, film, and a virtual item in the virtual environment.
Wang et al. (US 2024/0146551 A1) disclose method and apparatus for communicating with a metaverse device, including associate an NFT metaverse phone with an avatar of a virtual world linked to the subscriber, or upon a request generated by the subscriber once the subscriber creates an avatar of interest.
Goncalves et al. (US 2023/0077278 A1) disclose artificial reality content management, including components that generate and export non-fungible tokens using object recognition.
Maurer (US 2023/0334569 A1) discloses system for managing the conversion of quantities of non-fungible tokens, including receiving a request from the user to consume a constituent NFT in the metaverse, generating a 3D object in the metaverse based on the image, and allowing the user to control an avatar of the user to consume the 3D object in the metaverse.
Orofino et al. (US 2023/0267526 A1) disclose analyzing and tracking user actions over digital twin models and in the metaverse, including a user navigating to an object in the metaverse and the object is identified as a potential object of interest to the user. The user engages with a dynamically generated link, which leads the user to an electronic commerce (e-commerce) website where the user can purchase the object.
Weinberg (US 2024/0377919 A1) discloses non-fungible token gallery, including an authentication module configured to authenticate a user to access the NFT virtual environment.
Zhao (US 2026/0044890 A1) discloses metaverse-based luxury item experiencing system and method, including an NFT luxury item transaction authentication module configured to issue a 3D luxury item as an NFT luxury item when the 3D luxury item is sold in the metaverse by a metaverse simulation module, and perform transaction authentication for the corresponding luxury store terminal.
Siu et al. (US 2024/0220953 A1) disclose hybrid asset management system, including storing physical items at a physical storage vault, such as valuable physical items having digital twin NFTs..
Lee (US 2025/0053942 A1) discloses system for providing financial transaction services in conjunction with metaverse environment and method of operating the same, including performing identity authentication using a face image and identification card image of a first remittance requestor when the first electronic wallet is linked to the metaverse service provision server.
Festa (US 2020/0143565 A1) discloses systems and methods for scanning three-dimensional objects, including obtaining a set of images by, for example, guiding a user to position an imaging sensor in the set of imaging positions through a user interface, such as an XR interface.
Singh et al. (US 2024/0031162 A1) disclose system for digital identity detection and verification when traversing between virtual environments, including an intelligent mechanism to establish a digital identity of the user using non-fungible tokens (NFT). To access virtual environments in the metaverse, users often establish a digital representative, i.e., an avatar. Each user's avatar may have a different form, which when combined with information that uniquely identifies the user, can be used as a digital identity. This digital identity is then recorded as an NFT (and may have an outward appearance as the avatar)..
Saraf et al. (US 2023/0351353 A1) disclose systems and methods for frictionless payments in web3 and the metaverse, including a buyer connecting its vault/digital wallet to a digital collectable source, such as a digital collectable marketplace. For example, the buyer may connect to the Metaverse, a NFT marketplace, a merchant shop, etc. by scanning a QR code or a bar code, by signing in using a process such as Sign In With Ethereum (SIWE), etc. SIWE and similar processes may allow additional data to be shared.
Lal et al. (US 2024/0211909 A1) disclose systems and methods for enabling non-fungible tokens (NFTs) in a virtual/metaverse environment, including detecting linking of crypto wallet account that is associated with NFTs with a virtual or Metaverse account, determining that a plurality of NFTs from the crypto wallet account are displayed, generating a weighted taxonomy for the NFTs displayed, determining interest of a new user in relation to the taxonomy of NFTs generated, determining a match based on the interest and the taxonomy, providing guidance for the new user and a user (or users) whose NFTs were used to create the taxonomy, executing an NFT sale or trade, and recording the transaction in blockchain.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDUARDO D CASTILHO whose telephone number is (571)270-1592. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8-5.
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, 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.
/EDUARDO CASTILHO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3698
Prosecution Insights