Detailed Action
This is a Non-Final Office action in response to communications received on 4/20/2026. Claims 1, 2, 13, 14 and 20 were amended. Claims 1-20 are pending and are examined.
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 5/5/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments regarding the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 of the claims under Benedetto and Diesch have been considered, but are moot because the new ground of rejection necessitated from amending the independent claims 1, 13 and 20. The instant rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically argued in the Applicant's response.
Consequently, the rejection of the claims under 35 U.S.C. 103 is presented as below.
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 1-9 and 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Benedetto (US 20230079127 A1), in view of Quigley (US 20220351195 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Benedetto teaches the limitations of claim 1 substantially as follows:
A computer-implemented method comprising: projecting a future amount of demand for NFTs based at least in part on gameplay information indicating a number of players currently eligible for an NFT; (Benedetto; Para(s). [0061]-[0062]: monitor not just a single end-user entity's gameplay but possibly to monitor multiple entities' gameplay as occurring in parallel across multiple execution instances of the same game as happening concurrently (i.e., based at least in part on gameplay information indicating a number of players currently eligible for an NFT); multiple potential NFTs may be minted in advance (i.e. projecting a future amount of demand for NFTs) so that one of those NFTs can ultimately be provided)
receiving, by the token management service, a request for at least one NFT; and (Benedetto; Para(s). [0067]: after performing an indicated event (i.e. request for at least one NFT) the first NFT may be encrypted and sent over the open Internet or the CDN from above to the winning entity's client device or its remotely-located personal NFT repository)
providing, by the token management service, at least one pre-minted NFT from the pool in response to the request. (Benedetto; Para(s). [0067]: after performing an indicated event the first NFT may be encrypted and sent over the open Internet or the CDN from above to the winning entity's client device or its remotely-located personal NFT repository (i.e. providing, by the token management service, the at least one pre-minted NFT in response to the request))
Benedetto does not teach the limitations of claim 1 as follows:
detecting, by a token management service, an event indicative of at least one pre-minted NFT being removed from a pool of pre-minted NFTs;
identifying, by the token management service, the number of pre-minted NFTs available in the pool in response to detecting the event;
when the identified number of pre-minted NFTs available in the pool is below a threshold number corresponding to the future amount of demand, pre-minting additional NFTs until the number of pre-minted NFTs in the pool matches the threshold number;
However, in the same field of endeavor, Quigley discloses the limitations of claim 1 as follows:
detecting, by a token management service, an event indicative of at least one pre-minted NFT being removed from a pool of pre-minted NFTs; (Quigley; [0027]: In embodiments, the method further includes receiving a second request to mint a requested token for a recipient (i.e., event indicative of at least one pre-minted NFT being removed from a pool), determining that the requested token does not match any of the plurality of minted tokens in the account associated with the minting smart contract, based on the determining, generating a unique identifier, minting the requested token using the plurality of data values and the unique identifier, and transferring the requested token to the recipient)
identifying, by the token management service, the number of pre-minted NFTs available in the pool in response to detecting the event; (Quigley; [0027]: In embodiments, the method further includes receiving a second request to mint a requested token for a recipient, determining that the requested token does not match any of the plurality of minted tokens in the account associated with the minting smart contract (i.e., identifying the number of pre-minted NFTs available in the pool), based on the determining, generating a unique identifier, minting the requested token using the plurality of data values and the unique identifier, and transferring the requested token to the recipient)
when the identified number of pre-minted NFTs available in the pool is below a threshold number corresponding to the future amount of demand, pre-minting additional NFTs until the number of pre-minted NFTs in the pool matches the threshold number; (Quigley; [0027]: In embodiments, the method further includes receiving a second request to mint a requested token for a recipient, determining that the requested token does not match any of the plurality of minted tokens in the account associated with the minting smart contract, based on the determining, generating a unique identifier, minting the requested token using the plurality of data values and the unique identifier, and transferring the requested token to the recipient (i.e., pre-minting additional NFTs until the number of pre-minted NFTs in the pool matches the threshold number))
Quigley is combinable with Benedetto because both are from the same field of endeavor of management of NFTs. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system of Benedetto to incorporate monitoring a pool of tokens in order to determine minting of additional tokens as in Quigley in order to support supplementing supply of a pool of tokens according to a system’s need.
Regarding claim 2, Benedetto and Quigley teach the limitations of claim 1.
Benedetto and Quigley teach the limitations of claim 2 as follows:
The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein pre-minting the additional NFTs comprises adding the additional pre-minted NFTs to the pool until the pool includes a number of NFTs that matches the threshold. (Benedetto; [0064]: once each entity passes the threshold, the system may begin minting a potential NFT for that entity as if that entity had already completed the task itself and won the corresponding NFT since passing the threshold signifies a higher likelihood of that entity completing the task than others who have not crossed the threshold yet (threshold amount of pre-minted tokens will be equal to the number of players who have achieved a partial-completion threshold))
Regarding claim 3, Benedetto and Quigley teach the limitations of claim 1.
Benedetto and Quigley teach the limitations of claim 3 as follows:
The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the token management service receives the request from a digital game system. (Benedetto; Para(s). [0050] & [0067]: the end-user entity from above is the first entity/user to actually find the skin at its designated virtual location within the video game's virtual world (i.e. the token management service receives the request from a digital game system) and after performing an indicated event the first NFT may be encrypted and sent over the open Internet or the CDN from above to the winning entity's client device or its remotely-located personal NFT repository)
Regarding claim 4, Benedetto and Quigley teach the limitations of claim 3.
Benedetto and Quigley teach the limitations of claim 4 as follows:
The computer-implemented method of claim 3, wherein the at least one pre- minted NFT corresponds to a digital asset provided to a player of a digital game of the digital game system. (Benedetto; Para(s). [0051]: the entity has been awarded the associated NFT for the skin, which may provide the entity with the exclusive right to use that skin in the game in which it was found (i.e. a digital asset provided to a player of a digital game of the digital game system))
Regarding claim 5, Benedetto and Quigley teach the limitations of claim 4.
Benedetto and Quigley teach the limitations of claim 5 as follows:
The computer-implemented method of claim 4, wherein the digital asset comprises a game element within the digital game of the digital game system. (Benedetto; Para(s). [0051]: the entity has been awarded the associated NFT for the skin, which may provide the entity with the exclusive right to use that skin in the game in which it was found (i.e. the digital asset comprises a game element within the digital game of the digital game system))
Regarding claim 6, Benedetto and Quigley teach the limitations of claim 4.
Benedetto and Quigley teach the limitations of claim 6 as follows:
The computer-implemented method of claim 4, wherein the digital game system bases use of the digital asset by the player at least in part on a record of the at least one pre-minted NFT. (Benedetto; Para(s). [0051]: the entity has been awarded the associated NFT for the skin, which may provide the entity with the exclusive right to use that skin in the game in which it was found (i.e. bases use of the digital asset by the player at least in part on a record of the at least one pre- minted NFT))
Regarding claim 7, Benedetto and Quigley teach the limitations of claim 4.
Benedetto and Quigley teach the limitations of claim 7 as follows:
The computer-implemented method of claim 4, wherein providing, by the token management service, the at least one pre-minted NFT in response to the request comprises providing real-time access by the player to the digital asset within the digital game. (Benedetto; Para(s). [0051] & [0062]: one of those NFTs can ultimately be provided to the eventual winner of the NFT (first to perform the task) immediately after the task is fully completed by that entity which may provide the entity with the exclusive right to use that skin in the game in which it was found (i.e. real-time access by the player to the digital asset within the digital game))
Regarding claim 8, Benedetto and Quigley teach the limitations of claim 4.
Benedetto and Quigley teach the limitations of claim 8 as follows:
The computer-implemented method of claim 4, wherein providing, by the token management service, the at least one pre-minted NFT in response to the request comprises providing a real-time ability to trade, via the blockchain and by the player, the digital asset with at least one other player of the digital game. (Benedetto; Para(s). [0022]: an example GUI that lists a particular user's NFTs as won through gameplay and that provides for the ability to transfer or use the associated digital asset itself consistent with present principles (i.e. a real-time ability to trade, via the blockchain and by the player, the digital asset with at least one other player of the digital game))
Regarding claim 9, Benedetto and Quigley teach the limitations of claim 4.
Benedetto and Quigley teach the limitations of claim 9 as follows:
The computer-implemented method of claim 4, further comprising storing the at least one pre-minted NFT in a wallet corresponding to the player of the digital game. (Benedetto; Para(s). [0067]: after performing an indicated event the first NFT may be encrypted and sent over the open Internet or the CDN from above to the winning entity's client device or its remotely-located personal NFT repository (i.e. a wallet corresponding to the player of the digital game))
Regarding claim 13, Benedetto teaches the limitations of claim 1 substantially as follows:
A system comprising: at least one physical processor; and physical memory comprising computer-executable instructions that, when executed by the physical processor, cause the physical processor to: (Benedetto; Para(s). [0004]: a system includes at least one computer medium that is not a transitory signal and that includes instructions executable by at least one processor to determine that a first end-user entity has performed a task for which a first non-fungible token (NFT) is to be provided)
project a future amount of demand for NFTs based at least in part on gameplay information indicating a number of players currently eligible for an NFT; (Benedetto; Para(s). [0061]-[0062]: monitor not just a single end-user entity's gameplay but possibly to monitor multiple entities' gameplay as occurring in parallel across multiple execution instances of the same game as happening concurrently (i.e., based at least in part on gameplay information indicating a number of players currently eligible for an NFT); multiple potential NFTs may be minted in advance (i.e. projecting a future amount of demand for NFTs) so that one of those NFTs can ultimately be provided)
receive, by the token management service, a request for at least one NFT; and (Benedetto; Para(s). [0067]: after performing an indicated event (i.e. request for at least one NFT) the first NFT may be encrypted and sent over the open Internet or the CDN from above to the winning entity's client device or its remotely-located personal NFT repository)
provide, by the token management service, at least one pre-minted NFT from the pool in response to the request. (Benedetto; Para(s). [0067]: after performing an indicated event the first NFT may be encrypted and sent over the open Internet or the CDN from above to the winning entity's client device or its remotely-located personal NFT repository (i.e. providing, by the token management service, the at least one pre-minted NFT in response to the request))
Benedetto does not teach the limitations of claim 13 as follows:
detect, by a token management service, an event indicative of at least one pre-minted NFT being removed from a pool of pre-minted NFTs;
identify, by the token management service, the number of pre-minted NFTs available in the pool in response to detecting the event;
when the identified number of pre-minted NFTs available in the pool is below a threshold number corresponding to the future amount of demand, pre-mint additional NFTs until the number of pre-minted NFTs in the pool matches the threshold number;
However, in the same field of endeavor, Quigley discloses the limitations of claim 13 as follows:
detect, by a token management service, an event indicative of at least one pre-minted NFT being removed from a pool of pre-minted NFTs; (Quigley; [0027]: In embodiments, the method further includes receiving a second request to mint a requested token for a recipient (i.e., event indicative of at least one pre-minted NFT being removed from a pool), determining that the requested token does not match any of the plurality of minted tokens in the account associated with the minting smart contract, based on the determining, generating a unique identifier, minting the requested token using the plurality of data values and the unique identifier, and transferring the requested token to the recipient)
identify, by the token management service, the number of pre-minted NFTs available in the pool in response to detecting the event; (Quigley; [0027]: In embodiments, the method further includes receiving a second request to mint a requested token for a recipient, determining that the requested token does not match any of the plurality of minted tokens in the account associated with the minting smart contract (i.e., identifying the number of pre-minted NFTs available in the pool), based on the determining, generating a unique identifier, minting the requested token using the plurality of data values and the unique identifier, and transferring the requested token to the recipient)
when the identified number of pre-minted NFTs available in the pool is below a threshold number corresponding to the future amount of demand, pre-mint additional NFTs until the number of pre-minted NFTs in the pool matches the threshold number; (Quigley; [0027]: In embodiments, the method further includes receiving a second request to mint a requested token for a recipient, determining that the requested token does not match any of the plurality of minted tokens in the account associated with the minting smart contract, based on the determining, generating a unique identifier, minting the requested token using the plurality of data values and the unique identifier, and transferring the requested token to the recipient (i.e., pre-minting additional NFTs until the number of pre-minted NFTs in the pool matches the threshold number))
Quigley is combinable with Benedetto because both are from the same field of endeavor of management of NFTs. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system of Benedetto to incorporate monitoring a pool of tokens in order to determine minting of additional tokens as in Quigley in order to support supplementing supply of a pool of tokens according to a system’s need.
Regarding claim 14, Benedetto and Quigley teach the limitations of claim 13.
Benedetto and Quigley teach the limitations of claim 14 as follows:
The system of claim 13, wherein the computer-executable instructions further cause the processor to add the additional pre-minted NFTs to the pool until the pool includes a number of NFTs that matches the threshold. (Benedetto; [0064]: once each entity passes the threshold, the system may begin minting a potential NFT for that entity as if that entity had already completed the task itself and won the corresponding NFT since passing the threshold signifies a higher likelihood of that entity completing the task than others who have not crossed the threshold yet (threshold amount of pre-minted tokens will be equal to the number of players who have achieved a partial-completion threshold))
Regarding claim 15, Benedetto and Quigley teach the limitations of claim 13.
Benedetto and Quigley teach the limitations of claim 15 as follows:
The system of claim 13, wherein the token management service receives the request from a digital game system. (Benedetto; Para(s). [0050] & [0067]: the end-user entity from above is the first entity/user to actually find the skin at its designated virtual location within the video game's virtual world (i.e. the token management service receives the request from a digital game system) and after performing an indicated event the first NFT may be encrypted and sent over the open Internet or the CDN from above to the winning entity's client device or its remotely-located personal NFT repository)
Regarding claim 16, Benedetto and Quigley teach the limitations of claim 15.
Benedetto and Quigley teach the limitations of claim 16 as follows:
The system of claim 15, wherein the at least one pre-minted NFT corresponds to a digital asset provided to a player of a digital game of the digital game system. (Benedetto; Para(s). [0051]: the entity has been awarded the associated NFT for the skin, which may provide the entity with the exclusive right to use that skin in the game in which it was found (i.e. a digital asset provided to a player of a digital game of the digital game system))
Regarding claim 17, Benedetto and Quigley teach the limitations of claim 16.
Benedetto and Quigley teach the limitations of claim 17 as follows:
The system of claim 16, wherein the digital asset comprises a game element within the digital game of the digital game system. (Benedetto; Para(s). [0051]: the entity has been awarded the associated NFT for the skin, which may provide the entity with the exclusive right to use that skin in the game in which it was found (i.e. the digital asset comprises a game element within the digital game of the digital game system))
Regarding claim 18, Benedetto and Quigley teach the limitations of claim 16.
Benedetto and Quigley teach the limitations of claim 18 as follows:
The system of claim 16, wherein the digital game system bases use of the digital asset by the player at least in part on a record of the at least one pre-minted NFT. (Benedetto; Para(s). [0051]: the entity has been awarded the associated NFT for the skin, which may provide the entity with the exclusive right to use that skin in the game in which it was found (i.e. bases use of the digital asset by the player at least in part on a record of the at least one pre- minted NFT))
Regarding claim 19, Benedetto and Quigley teach the limitations of claim 16.
Benedetto and Quigley teach the limitations of claim 19 as follows:
The system of claim 16, wherein providing, by the token management service, the at least one pre-minted NFT in response to the request comprises providing real-time access by the player to the digital asset within the digital game. (Benedetto; Para(s). [0051] & [0062]: one of those NFTs can ultimately be provided to the eventual winner of the NFT (first to perform the task) immediately after the task is fully completed by that entity which may provide the entity with the exclusive right to use that skin in the game in which it was found (i.e. real-time access by the player to the digital asset within the digital game))
Regarding claim 20, Benedetto teaches the limitations of claim 1 substantially as follows:
A non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising one or more computer-executable instructions that, when executed by at least one processor of a computing device, cause the computing device to: (Benedetto; Para(s). [0004]: a system includes at least one computer medium that is not a transitory signal and that includes instructions executable by at least one processor to determine that a first end-user entity has performed a task for which a first non-fungible token (NFT) is to be provided)
project a future amount of demand for NFTs based at least in part on gameplay information indicating a number of players currently eligible for an NFT; (Benedetto; Para(s). [0061]-[0062]: monitor not just a single end-user entity's gameplay but possibly to monitor multiple entities' gameplay as occurring in parallel across multiple execution instances of the same game as happening concurrently (i.e., based at least in part on gameplay information indicating a number of players currently eligible for an NFT); multiple potential NFTs may be minted in advance (i.e. projecting a future amount of demand for NFTs) so that one of those NFTs can ultimately be provided)
receive, by a token management service, a request for at least one NFT; and (Benedetto; Para(s). [0067]: after performing an indicated event (i.e. request for at least one NFT) the first NFT may be encrypted and sent over the open Internet or the CDN from above to the winning entity's client device or its remotely-located personal NFT repository)
provide, by the token management service, at least one pre-minted NFT from the pool in response to the request. (Benedetto; Para(s). [0067]: after performing an indicated event the first NFT may be encrypted and sent over the open Internet or the CDN from above to the winning entity's client device or its remotely-located personal NFT repository (i.e. providing, by the token management service, the at least one pre-minted NFT in response to the request))
Benedetto does not teach the limitations of claim 20 as follows:
detect, by a token management service, an event indicative of at least one pre-minted NFT being removed from a pool fore-minted NFTs;
identify, by the token management service, the number of pre-minted NFTs available in the pool in response to detecting the event;
when the identified number of pre-minted NFTs available in the pool is below a threshold number corresponding to the future amount of demand, pre-mint additional NFTs until the number of pre-minted NFTs in the pool matches the threshold number;
However, in the same field of endeavor, Quigley discloses the limitations of claim 20 as follows:
detect, by a token management service, an event indicative of at least one pre-minted NFT being removed from a pool fore-minted NFTs; (Quigley; [0027]: In embodiments, the method further includes receiving a second request to mint a requested token for a recipient (i.e., event indicative of at least one pre-minted NFT being removed from a pool), determining that the requested token does not match any of the plurality of minted tokens in the account associated with the minting smart contract, based on the determining, generating a unique identifier, minting the requested token using the plurality of data values and the unique identifier, and transferring the requested token to the recipient)
identify, by the token management service, the number of pre-minted NFTs available in the pool in response to detecting the event; (Quigley; [0027]: In embodiments, the method further includes receiving a second request to mint a requested token for a recipient, determining that the requested token does not match any of the plurality of minted tokens in the account associated with the minting smart contract (i.e., identifying the number of pre-minted NFTs available in the pool), based on the determining, generating a unique identifier, minting the requested token using the plurality of data values and the unique identifier, and transferring the requested token to the recipient)
when the identified number of pre-minted NFTs available in the pool is below a threshold number corresponding to the future amount of demand, pre-mint additional NFTs until the number of pre-minted NFTs in the pool matches the threshold number; (Quigley; [0027]: In embodiments, the method further includes receiving a second request to mint a requested token for a recipient, determining that the requested token does not match any of the plurality of minted tokens in the account associated with the minting smart contract, based on the determining, generating a unique identifier, minting the requested token using the plurality of data values and the unique identifier, and transferring the requested token to the recipient (i.e., pre-minting additional NFTs until the number of pre-minted NFTs in the pool matches the threshold number))
Quigley is combinable with Benedetto because both are from the same field of endeavor of management of NFTs. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system of Benedetto to incorporate monitoring a pool of tokens in order to determine minting of additional tokens as in Quigley in order to support supplementing supply of a pool of tokens according to a system’s need.
Claims 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Benedetto (US 20230079127 A1), in view of Quigley (US 20220351195 A1), as applied to independent claims, in view of Mikulich (US 20230177921 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Benedetto and Quigley teach the limitations of claim 9.
Benedetto and Quigley do not teach the limitations of claim 10 as follows:
The computer-implemented method of claim 9, wherein the wallet comprises a custodial wallet managed by an administrator of the digital game system on behalf of the player.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Mikulich discloses the limitations of claim 10 as follows:
The computer-implemented method of claim 9, wherein the wallet comprises a custodial wallet managed by an administrator of the digital game system on behalf of the player. (Mikulich; Para(s). [0051]: the wallet software may implement a custodial wallet that is owned and maintained by a casino gaming entity for storing ownership information associated with casino charm NFTs. The use of a custodial wallets allows patrons to buy/sell/receive casino charm NFTs without using a personal crypto wallet (i.e. custodial wallet managed by an administrator of the digital game system on behalf of the player))
Mikulich is combinable with Benedetto and Quigley because all are from the same field of endeavor of management of NFTs. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system of Benedetto and Quigley to incorporate custodial wallets as in Mikulich in order to allow users to buy/sell/receive gaming NFTs without using a personal crypto wallet (Mikulich; Para. [0051]).
Regarding claim 11, Benedetto, Quigley and Mikulich teach the limitations of claim 10.
Benedetto, Quigley and Mikulich teach the limitations of claim 11 as follows:
The computer-implemented method of claim 10, further comprising: identifying a vesting event that awards the player ongoing access to the at least one pre- minted NFT; and (Benedetto; Para(s). [0067]: after performing an indicated event the first NFT may be encrypted and sent over the open Internet or the CDN from above to the winning entity's client device or its remotely-located personal NFT repository (i.e. identifying a vesting event that awards the player ongoing access to the at least one pre- minted NFT))
in response to identifying the vesting event, assigning the custodial wallet to the player. (Mikulich; Para(s). [0051]: the wallet software may implement a custodial wallet that is owned and maintained by a casino gaming entity for storing ownership information associated with casino charm NFTs. The use of a custodial wallets allows patrons to buy/sell/receive casino charm NFTs without using a personal crypto wallet (i.e. assigning the custodial wallet to the player))
The same motivation to combine as in claim 10 is applicable to the instant claim.
Regarding claim 12, Benedetto, Quigley and Mikulich teach the limitations of claim 11.
Benedetto, Quigley and Mikulich teach the limitations of claim 12 as follows:
The computer-implemented method of claim 11, wherein the vesting event comprises at least one of: the player registering an account within the digital game system; the player making a purchase within the digital game system; or a game event within the digital game. (Benedetto; Para(s). [0067]: after performing an indicated event the first NFT may be encrypted and sent over the open Internet or the CDN from above to the winning entity's client device or its remotely-located personal NFT repository (i.e. a game event within the digital game))
Prior Art Considered But Not Relied Upon
Baker (US 20230266930 A1) which teaches data included in an NFT which can be any work of authorship, including but not limited to digital artwork such as graphic art, a photograph, a three-dimensional (3D) model, a GIF or a video, in-game items and other digital assets purchased for use in a videogame or other virtual platform.
Anapliotis (US 20240202725 A1) which teaches NFTs representing video game assets which may be incorporated into a custodial wallet.
Conclusion
For the above-stated reasons, claims 1-20 are rejected.
Applicant’s amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BLAKE ISAAC NARRAMORE whose telephone number is (303)297-4357. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 0700-1700 MT.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Taghi T Arani can be reached on (571) 272-3787. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BLAKE I NARRAMORE/Examiner, Art Unit 2438
Prosecution Insights