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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 April 06, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on April 06, 2026 has been entered. Applicant has amended claim 1. Claims 1-9 are now pending have been examined and currently stand rejected.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chan et al. (US 12,380,432 B1) hereinafter “Chan” in view of Jakobsson et al. (US 2023/0009304 A1), “Jakobsson”, in view of Rideout et al. (US 8,006,232 B1).
Regarding claim 1: Chan disclose:
A method of generating graphics for digital assets, comprising:
receiving an input identifying a first digital wallet; (See at least Chan, Abs.; Col. 3 lines 12-20; Chan disclose receiving an input (i.e., connects) identifying a first digital wallet (i.e., token minter connects with a digital wallet associated with the user).)
selecting, from one or more non-fungible tokens, at least one non-fungible token, including at least one attribute; (See at least Chan, Fig. 4B; Col. 3 lines 11-36; The non-fungible token lists the attributes.)
generating, based on at least one attribute of the digital assets corresponding to each token of the selected at least one non-fungible token, a graphic; (See at least Chan, Fig. 4B steps 146 and 440; Col 5 lines 12-20; Chan disclose generating a graphic (i.e., image) based on at least one attribute corresponding to each token of the selected at least one non-fungible token (i.e., based on metadata/attributes).)
providing the graphic to the virtual environment; and (See at least Chan, Col. 6 lines 35-36; display the image.)
displaying the graphic within the virtual environment. (See at least Chan, Col. 6 lines 35-36; display the image.)
Chan does not explicitly disclose, however, Jakobsson teaches identifying one or more non-fungible tokens associated with the first digital wallet; (See at least Jakobsson, [0051]; The method determines that the advertisement token has been added to a digital wallet.)
determining, via a graphics generator which of the one or more non-fungible tokens are compatible with and can be rendered in a virtual environment; and selecting compatible NFTs (See at least Jakobsson, [0157]; [0160-0161]; [0171]; [0269]; [0280] Additionally, the specific manner in which NFTs can be utilized within NFT platforms in accordance with various embodiments of the invention is largely dependent upon the requirements of a given application. NFTs 106 that are implemented using smart contracts 108 having interfaces that comply with open standards are not limited to being stored within media wallets and can be stored in any of a variety of wallet applications as appropriate to the requirements.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the above combination and include Jakobsson’s teachings in order to builds trust and ensures NFTs can be reliably used across the platform.
The combination of Chan and Jakobsson do not explicitly disclose, however Rideout reaches: receiving, via the graphics generator, an application programming interface (API) call from an API; (See at least Rideout, Abs.; Fig. 8; Col. 3 lines 55-66; Col 5 lines 1-11 and 21-26; an API call from an API (I.e., API call) is received via the graphics generator (i.e., graphics application).) and providing the graphic to the virtual environment in response to receiving the API call (See at least Rideout, claim 2; performing the graphics API calls to generate a set of framebuffer data for a display image; and displaying the display image on a user interface provided by the host competent of the graphical application debugger.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the above combination and include Rideout’s teachings in order to provide a fast, scalable, and user-friendly NFT experience.
Claim(s) 2-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chan, Jakobsson and Rideout as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Andon et al (US 2025/0258895 A1).
Regarding Claim 2: The combination of Chan, Jakobsson and Rideout disclose the method of claim 1. The combination do not explicitly disclose; however, Andon teaches wherein generating the graphic includes providing the at least one attribute of the digital assets corresponding to each token of the selected at least one non-fungible token to a trained artificial intelligence model. (See at least Andon, [0070]; [0079]; A machine learning function may be executed at predefined process block 117 in order to generate image features through a neural network.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the above combination and include Andon’s teachings in order to provide a dynamic and personalized experience to the users.
Regarding claim 3: The combination of Chan, Jakobsson and Rideout disclose the method of claim 1. The combination do not explicitly disclose; however, Andon teaches wherein the graphic is generated based on data received from an application programming interface. (See at least Andon, [0070]; [0098] In one configuration, the application 224 may access the genetic code of the digital asset on the blockchain 60 via an API or other software interface; The 3rd party integration service 66 may operate as an API on an app provided on the user's device, or as a dedicated cloud based service. In some embodiments, the 3rd party integration service 66 may make the virtual object (for example, as expressed by the virtual object generator 62).)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the above combination and include Andon’s teachings in order to provide a dynamic and personalized experience to the users.
Regarding claim 4: The combination of Chan, Jakobsson and Rideout disclose the method of claim 1. The combination do not explicitly disclose; however, Andon teaches wherein at least one of the one or more nonfungible tokens is associated with a brand digital asset including brand guidelines, and wherein the graphic is generated based on the brand guidelines. (See at least Andon, [0035] In some embodiments, a digital asset may be created for brand promotion purposes.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the above combination and include Andon’s teachings in order to promote the service and provide a dynamic and personalized experience to the users.
Claim(s) 5 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chan, Jakobsson, Rideout and Andon as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Andon et al. (US 2022/0300966 A1), hereinafter “Andon 0966”.
Regarding claim 5: The combination of Chan, Jakobsson, Rideout and Andon disclose the method of claim 4. However, the combination does not explicitly disclose wherein the brand guidelines include a logo, and wherein the logo is included in the graphic.
Andon 0966, on the other hand teaches, wherein the brand guidelines include a logo, and wherein the logo is included in the graphic (See at least Andon 0966, [0007]; [0023-0024]; For example, the NFT 18 may include a first ad token container representing a primary logo displayed in large-form on the center of the jersey 16, non-functional descriptive material language that does not affect the positively recited steps in claim 1.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chan and include Andon 0966’s teachings in order to promote the service and provide a dynamic and personalized experience to the users.
Regarding claim 7: The combination of Chan, Jakobsson, Rideout, Andon and Andon 0966 disclose the method of claim 5. The combination further disclose wherein the graphic includes a logo, and wherein a total display time of the logo in the virtual environment is based, at least in part, on a timing attribute of at least one digital object corresponding to the selected at least one non-fungible token. (See at least Andon 0966, [0011]; [0030]; [0036]; Once published to the marketplace, users may enter the marketplace and agree to certain "sponsorships" whereby the user would agree to wear a logo on the primary asset for a predetermined amount of time; the sub-asset NFT may deteriorate or diminish as a function of time or use of the sub-asset within the digital world or in connection with the character avatar.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chan and include Andon 0966’s teachings in order to promote the service and provide a dynamic and personalized experience to the users.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chan, Jakobsson, Rideout and Andon as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of McDonnell et al. (US 20240062178 A1), hereinafter “McDonnell”.
Regarding claim 6: The combination of Chan, Jakobsson, Rideout and Andon disclose the method of claim 4. However, the combination does not explicitly disclose wherein an API endpoint is included as an attribute of the brand guidelines.
McDonnell, on the other hand teaches wherein an API endpoint is included as an attribute of the brand guidelines. (See at least McDonnell, [0030] In some cases, an address referenced in an NFT could be an application programming interface (API) endpoint that may vary information returned to the user, or implement a function based on the HTTP method through which the API endpoint is accessed.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention include teachings of McDonnell into the above combination in order to allow a property of the digital asset to be changed based on the operation performed and to provide publicly available information about the digital asset without the need for authentication. (McDonnell, [0033]).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chan, Jakobsson and Rideout n as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yantis et al. (US 2021/0326862 A1), hereinafter “Yantis”.
Regarding claim 8: The combination of Chan, Jakobsson and Rideout disclose the method of claim 1. However, the combination does not explicitly disclose wherein the graphic is not based on graphics associated with the digital assets corresponding to the selected at least one non-fungible token.
Yantis, on the other hand teaches wherein the graphic is not based on graphics associated with the digital assets corresponding to the selected at least one non-fungible token. (See at least Yantis, [0025]; [0027] T[0029]; [0032]; [0036] the graphic is not based on graphics associated with the digital assets corresponding to the selected at least one non-fungible token (e.g., the system generates unique items.).)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include into the above combination, teachings of Yantis in order to generate items that may be unique and vary in rarity among the various items. (Yantis, [0003]).
The portion which recites “wherein the graphic is not based on graphics associated with the digital assets corresponding to the selected at least one non-fungible token” is non-functional descriptive material. For example, this portion does not affect any of the positively recited steps.
It has been held that non-functional descriptive material will not distinguish the invention from the prior art in terms of patentability.
Examiner has provided prior art, where available, for these intended use and/or non-functional phrases/limitations, however, these phrases/limitations will not distinguish the invention from the prior art in terms of patentability. Accordingly, the prior art is only provided in the interest of compact prosecution.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chan, Jakobsson and Rideout as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Andon et al. (US 2022/0300966 A1), hereinafter “Andon 0966”.
Regarding claim 9: The combination of Chan, Jakobsson and Rideout disclose the method of claim 1. However, the combination does not explicitly disclose wherein the selected at least one nonfungible token includes a sponsorship non-fungible token associated with a sponsorship digital asset, wherein at least one attribute of the sponsorship digital asset is associated with a term of a sponsorship agreement.
Andon 0966, on the other hand teaches wherein the selected at least one nonfungible token includes a sponsorship non-fungible token associated with a sponsorship digital asset, wherein at least one attribute of the sponsorship digital asset is associated with a term of a sponsorship agreement .(See at least Andon 0966, [0007]; [0025]; In some embodiments, the second, sub-asset NFT may be an advertising asset and the image from the second digital graphics file may include an advertising logo In some embodiments, the logo 50 may simply be a component of a broader advertising/sponsorship agreement that may be represented by the advertising token/asset 32.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the above combination and include Andon 0966’s teachings in order to promote the service and provide a dynamic and personalized experience to the users.
Response to Arguments
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 101
Applicant's arguments filed April 06, 2026 regarding the claim rejections under 35 USC 101 have been fully considered. Amendment pp. 4-7. Examiner contends that the claims still could be considered to be reciting one or more abstract ideas (e.g., identifying and determining compatibility of tokens, generate and provide a graphic based on attributes of the tokens), however, the combination of the additional elements (i.e., API call, NFT, virtual environment) a recited in amended claim 1 integrate any alleged abstract idea into a practical application. In view of the current claim amendments, the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection is withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 103
Applicant's arguments filed November 24, 2025 regarding the claim rejections under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered. Applicant asserts “that checking for "sufficient funds" cannot be equated to determining if non-fungible tokens are compatible with and can be graphically rendered in a virtual environment, as required by independent claim 1, as amended”. Amendment P. 8. Examiner agrees. However, upon further consideration of the newly introduced language, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Chan, Jakobsson and Rideout. Examiner notes this feature is disclosed by “Jakobsson”.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Charlton: (US 20210389850 A1): [0023] In one aspect, a method of providing a user interface by a messaging application software development kit (SDK) included with a third party resource running on a portable device including a camera and a display, includes receiving, by the SDK, an API call to display an image processing user interface, displaying on the display of the portable device, a first user interface includes a list of selectable graphical items corresponding to a group of available image modification features, receiving user selection of a desired graphical item from the list of selectable graphical items, applying image modification features corresponding to the desired graphical item to an image received from the camera to generate a modified image, and. displaying, on the display of the portable device, a second user interface including the modified image.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KARLYANNIE M GARCIA whose telephone number is (571)272-6950. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30am - 4:30-pm.
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.
/K.G.M/Examiner, Art Unit 3698
/EDUARDO CASTILHO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3698
Prosecution Insights