DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Receipt of Applicant’s amendments filed on September 16, 2025 is acknowledged.
Response to Amendment
Applicant amended claims 1, 5, and 11.
Claims 1-20 are pending and have been examined.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed September 16, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding Priority
Examiner noted that Applicant claimed priority to an application filed in India on December 18, 2023; but did not file a certified copy of the 202/311086441 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55. Applicant has not addressed this in its subsequent filings.
Examiner maintains this objection.
Regarding 101 Rejections
Examiner initially rejected claims 1-20 under 35 USC 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Applicant argued that the claims a recite a practical application of the judicial exception. Applicant argued the claims present a technical improvement. Examiner does not find this argument persuasive. Applicant’s claims do not improve technology; the underlying technology remains unaffected by the claims. Applicant is addressing a business problem (processing transaction) with a business solution. Applicant is merely using existing technology (for its intended purpose) to implement the business solution. Any improvements lie in the abstract idea itself, not in underlying technology. It is not a technical solution to utilize a backup system. Furthermore, Applicant is not addressing bandwidth issues at a technical level. Rather, Applicant is merely monitoring the bandwidth but not doing anything based on that monitoring. The identified limitations do no amount to a practical application because they are a part of the abstract idea. Outside of the abstract idea there remains only the computer implementation of the abstract idea and extra-solution activity. Neither of these are indicative of a practical application. Applicant’s claims do not address a technical limitation/deficiency in the art and thus does not amount to a practical application.
Examiner maintains this rejection.
Regarding Prior Art Rejections
Examiner initially did not provide an art rejections to claims 1-20. Upon further search and consideration, Examiner has found a combination of references which reads on claims 1-10. Examiner was unable to find art that reads on claims 11-20.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in India on December 18, 2023. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the 202/311086441 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims recite the abstract idea which may be summarized as completing/processing transactions.
Step 1 Analysis
Applicants claims are directed to a process (claims 11-20), machine (claims 1-4), and manufacture/product (claims 5-10).
Step 2A, Prong 1 Analysis
Regarding claim 1;
Claim 1 recites the abstract idea/limitations of:
connecting to a backup exchange, wherein the backup exchange corresponds to a backup asset pool
detecting an unavailability of a primary exchange, wherein the primary exchange corresponds to a primary asset pool;
queuing received transaction requests;
completing the queued transaction requests with the backup asset pool using the backup exchange with a previously established connection to the backup exchange;
detecting an availability of the primary exchange; and
reconnecting to the primary exchange.
As drafted these limitations are a process that falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity grouping of abstract ideas; but for the recitation of generic computer components. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, recites performance of the limitation as commercial/legal interactions, then it falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas. By reciting/claiming a certain method of organizing human activity, Applicant’s claims are directed to an abstract idea.
Regarding claim 5;
Claim 5 recites the abstract idea/limitations of:
connecting to a second exchange
receiving a transaction request associated with a first exchange;
detecting a disconnection from a first exchange and a first pricing system;
connecting, in response to the detection, to a second pricing system and maintaining a prior connection to the second exchange; and
completing the transaction request using the second exchange and the second pricing system.
As drafted these limitations are a process that falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity grouping of abstract ideas; but for the recitation of generic computer components. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, recites performance of the limitation as commercial/legal interactions, then it falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas. By reciting/claiming a certain method of organizing human activity, Applicant’s claims are directed to an abstract idea.
Regarding claim 11;
Claim 11 recites the abstract idea/limitations of:
receiving a transaction request for a first asset pool corresponding to a first exchange transaction system;
detecting a first network connection to the first exchange transaction system and a second network connection to a second exchange transaction system;
routing the transaction request to the second exchange transaction system when the first network connection is disconnected and the second network connection is connected;
completing, using the second exchange transaction system, an exchange transaction with a second asset pool corresponding to the second exchange transaction system to fulfill the transaction request;
determining an expected downtime of the first network connection;
monitoring the second asset pool with respect to a value threshold corresponding to the expected downtime;
monitoring the second exchange with respect to a volume threshold corresponding to a workload to the second exchange for the expected downtime; and
providing a status report based on the monitoring.
As drafted these limitations are a process that falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity grouping of abstract ideas; but for the recitation of generic computer components. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, recites performance of the limitation as commercial/legal interactions, then it falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas. By reciting/claiming a certain method of organizing human activity, Applicant’s claims are directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2A, Prong 2 Analysis
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claims only recites system components for implementing the abstract idea and extra-solution activity. The claims recite the additional limitations of a system, a processor; a non-transitory computer-readable medium, instructions, a primary cryptocurrency exchange system, cryptocurrency, a backup cryptocurrency exchange system; and they are recited at a high level of generality. These system components amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer. These limitations generally link the use of the judicial exception to a technological environment and are not indicative of integration into a practical application. These additional elements, when considered separately and as an ordered combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claims as a whole do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claims are directed to an abstract idea without a practical application.
Step 2B Analysis
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because, when considered separately and as an ordered combination, they do not add significantly more (also known as an “inventive concept”) to the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of a system, a processor; a non-transitory computer-readable medium, instructions, a primary cryptocurrency exchange system, cryptocurrency, a backup cryptocurrency exchange system; amount to no more than mere components to implement the judicial exception using a generic computer components. For the same reason these elements are not sufficient to provide an inventive concept. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. See Applicant’s specification paragraphs [0058-0063] and [0100-0109], about implementation of the abstract idea using general purpose or special purpose computing devices; and MPEP 2106.05(f) where applying a computer as a tool is not indicative of significantly more. Accordingly, these additional elements, when considered separately and as an ordered combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Thus Applicant’s claims are not patent eligible.
Dependent Claims Analysis
As for dependent claims 2-4, 6-10, and 12-20, these claims recite limitations that further define the same abstract idea noted in independent claims 1, 5, and 11. Therefore, claims 2-4, 6-10, and 12-20 are considered ineligible subject matter for the reasons given above.
Thus, the dependent claims 2-4, 6-10, and 12-20 are not patent-eligible either.
Examiner Request
The Applicant is requested to indicate where in the specification there is support for amendments to claims should Applicant amend. The purpose of this is to reduce potential 35 USC 112(a) or 35 USC 112 first paragraph issues that can arise when claims are amended without support in the specification. The Examiner thanks the Applicant in advance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Examiner has conducted a prior art search and NPL search in view of the new claims and will cannot provide an art rejection at this time.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
Claims 1, 3, and 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gary, US Patent Application No 2021/0192500 in view of Robertson, US Patent Application No 2012/0158612.
Regarding Claim 1;
A system comprising:
a processor; and a non-transitory computer-readable medium having stored thereon instructions that are executable by the processor to cause the system to perform operations comprising:
See Garay [0035] Some examples described herein can generally require the use of computing devices, including processing and memory resources. For example, one or more examples described herein may be implemented, in whole or in part, on computing devices such as servers, desktop computers, cellular or smartphones, personal digital assistants (e.g., PDAs), laptop computers, virtual reality (VR) or augmented reality (AR) computers, network equipment (e.g., routers) and tablet devices. Memory, processing, and network resources may all be used in connection with the establishment, use, or performance of any example described herein (including with the performance of any method or with the implementation of any system).
See also Figure 1
connecting to a backup cryptocurrency exchange system, wherein the backup cryptocurrency exchange system corresponds to a backup asset pool;
See Garay [0077] In various implementations, the transaction computing system 300 can identify when a particular exchange 394 is down since transaction quotes, trade instruction messages, digital currency movement to and/or from the downed exchange 394, and payments to the downed exchange 394 may fail.
[0078] As an alternative to queueing the orders in the records database 346, the transaction computing system 300 can bypass the downed exchange 394 to provide quotes to clients, initiate transactions for the clients, and return transaction statuses to the clients when transactions are executed. The transaction computing system 300 can perform such tasks by leveraging the messaging engine 330 to maintain communications with the other exchange 390 (e.g., a functioning counterpart originating exchange), and performing or settling the transaction on-credit. Specifically, the transaction computing system 300 can form partnerships with certain crediting institutions 377 in the same marketplaces as the exchanges 390. Upon identifying that a particular exchange 394 is down, the exchange management engine 325 can trigger the messaging engine 330 to open communications with a corresponding crediting institution 377 that services the same or a similar service sector or area (e.g., a geographic area) as the downed exchange 394.
detecting an unavailability of a primary cryptocurrency exchange system, wherein the primary cryptocurrency exchange system corresponds to a primary asset pool;
See Garay [0078] As an alternative to queueing the orders in the records database 346, the transaction computing system 300 can bypass the downed exchange 394 to provide quotes to clients, initiate transactions for the clients, and return transaction statuses to the clients when transactions are executed. The transaction computing system 300 can perform such tasks by leveraging the messaging engine 330 to maintain communications with the other exchange 390 (e.g., a functioning counterpart originating exchange), and performing or settling the transaction on-credit. Specifically, the transaction computing system 300 can form partnerships with certain crediting institutions 377 in the same marketplaces as the exchanges 390. Upon identifying that a particular exchange 394 is down, the exchange management engine 325 can trigger the messaging engine 330 to open communications with a corresponding crediting institution 377 that services the same or a similar service sector or area (e.g., a geographic area) as the downed exchange 394.
queuing received cryptocurrency transaction requests directed to the primary cryptocurrency exchange system;
See Garay [0073] Specifically, in the event of a disabled market or exchange 390, the order management module 335 can queue orders in the records database 346, and then release the orders once the market or exchange 390 is reenabled.
[0075] In the event of a downed exchange 394 (e.g., due to scheduled maintenance), the order management module 335 can put a hold on the sub-orders, and queue them in the records database 346 until the downed exchange 394 comes back online.
completing the queued cryptocurrency transaction requests… using the backup cryptocurrency exchange system with a previously established connection to the backup cryptocurrency exchange system;
See Garay [0078] As an alternative to queueing the orders in the records database 346, the transaction computing system 300 can bypass the downed exchange 394 to provide quotes to clients, initiate transactions for the clients, and return transaction statuses to the clients when transactions are executed. The transaction computing system 300 can perform such tasks by leveraging the messaging engine 330 to maintain communications with the other exchange 390 (e.g., a functioning counterpart originating exchange), and performing or settling the transaction on-credit. Specifically, the transaction computing system 300 can form partnerships with certain crediting institutions 377 in the same marketplaces as the exchanges 390. Upon identifying that a particular exchange 394 is down, the exchange management engine 325 can trigger the messaging engine 330 to open communications with a corresponding crediting institution 377 that services the same or a similar service sector or area (e.g., a geographic area) as the downed exchange 394
detecting an availability of the primary cryptocurrency exchange system;
See Garay [0119] To settle the debt with the crediting institution, the computing system 300 can perform a number of functions depending upon which exchange 390 was experiencing downtime. For example, if the downed exchange 394 is the originating exchange, the computing system 300 can monitor the exchange 390 for an online status (730). When the originating exchange 390 comes back online, the computing system 300 can transmit trade instructions to the originating exchange 390 to perform the exchange transaction with the destination exchange 390 in accordance with the examples described herein (735).
and reconnecting to the primary cryptocurrency exchange system.
See Garay [0119] To settle the debt with the crediting institution, the computing system 300 can perform a number of functions depending upon which exchange 390 was experiencing downtime. For example, if the downed exchange 394 is the originating exchange, the computing system 300 can monitor the exchange 390 for an online status (730). When the originating exchange 390 comes back online, the computing system 300 can transmit trade instructions to the originating exchange 390 to perform the exchange transaction with the destination exchange 390 in accordance with the examples described herein (735).
Garay does not explicitly teach:
completing the queued cryptocurrency transaction requests with the backup asset pool;
Robertson teaches:
completing the queued cryptocurrency transaction requests with the backup asset pool;
See Robertson [0237] This guarantee innovation may be implemented in several ways. One method is similar to flow diagram FIG. 17C, except that in step 1734 the mortality table is either bounded by the guaranteed mortality table (in the event that the mortality table is allowed to float) or is not changed at all. In Step 1736, the actual LBU's in the unallocated account are compared with the LBU's that have been guaranteed and in Step 1737 transfers to and from the reserve pool ensure the customers achieve the guaranteed LBU allocation outcome. The reserve pool is invested in the same assets as the LBU's will be credited in, ensuring no long term investment risk mismatch.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include in the backup transactions of the primary reference, the ability to use a backup asset pool as taught by Robertson since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. Additional motivation includes allowing for the use of a backup asset pool allows for transactions to be completed right away as opposed to waiting.
Regarding Claim 3;
The system of claim 1, wherein the instructions further cause the system to perform operations comprising performing, in response to reconnecting to the primary cryptocurrency exchange system, a settlement transaction between the primary asset pool and the backup asset pool based on the completed queued cryptocurrency transaction requests.
See Garay [0088] Numerous variations of settling with the crediting institution 377 are also contemplated. For example, the transaction service implemented by the transaction computing system 300 can comprise a funding account at the crediting institution 377, which can be utilized by the exchange management engine 325 to settle funds with the receiving client or to settle an on-credit transaction by the crediting institution 377. In one example, the order management engine 335 can track the transaction flows of all on-credit transactions in its internal records 346 and/or as published on the decentralized ledger 370. At a settlement interval (e.g., once a week), the exchange management engine 325 can settle the final on-credit transaction amounts at each crediting institution 377 holding a credit balance.
Regarding Claim 5;
A non-transitory computer-readable medium having stored thereon instructions that are executable by a processor of a computing system to cause the computing system to perform operations comprising:
connecting to a second cryptocurrency exchange system;
See Garay [0077] In various implementations, the transaction computing system 300 can identify when a particular exchange 394 is down since transaction quotes, trade instruction messages, digital currency movement to and/or from the downed exchange 394, and payments to the downed exchange 394 may fail.
[0078] As an alternative to queueing the orders in the records database 346, the transaction computing system 300 can bypass the downed exchange 394 to provide quotes to clients, initiate transactions for the clients, and return transaction statuses to the clients when transactions are executed. The transaction computing system 300 can perform such tasks by leveraging the messaging engine 330 to maintain communications with the other exchange 390 (e.g., a functioning counterpart originating exchange), and performing or settling the transaction on-credit. Specifically, the transaction computing system 300 can form partnerships with certain crediting institutions 377 in the same marketplaces as the exchanges 390. Upon identifying that a particular exchange 394 is down, the exchange management engine 325 can trigger the messaging engine 330 to open communications with a corresponding crediting institution 377 that services the same or a similar service sector or area (e.g., a geographic area) as the downed exchange 394.
receiving a cryptocurrency transaction request;
See Garay [0078] As an alternative to queueing the orders in the records database 346, the transaction computing system 300 can bypass the downed exchange 394 to provide quotes to clients, initiate transactions for the clients, and return transaction statuses to the clients when transactions are executed. The transaction computing system 300 can perform such tasks by leveraging the messaging engine 330 to maintain communications with the other exchange 390 (e.g., a functioning counterpart originating exchange), and performing or settling the transaction on-credit. Specifically, the transaction computing system 300 can form partnerships with certain crediting institutions 377 in the same marketplaces as the exchanges 390. Upon identifying that a particular exchange 394 is down, the exchange management engine 325 can trigger the messaging engine 330 to open communications with a corresponding crediting institution 377 that services the same or a similar service sector or area (e.g., a geographic area) as the downed exchange 394.
detecting a disconnection from a first cryptocurrency exchange system and a first pricing system;
See Garay [0078] As an alternative to queueing the orders in the records database 346, the transaction computing system 300 can bypass the downed exchange 394 to provide quotes to clients, initiate transactions for the clients, and return transaction statuses to the clients when transactions are executed. The transaction computing system 300 can perform such tasks by leveraging the messaging engine 330 to maintain communications with the other exchange 390 (e.g., a functioning counterpart originating exchange), and performing or settling the transaction on-credit. Specifically, the transaction computing system 300 can form partnerships with certain crediting institutions 377 in the same marketplaces as the exchanges 390. Upon identifying that a particular exchange 394 is down, the exchange management engine 325 can trigger the messaging engine 330 to open communications with a corresponding crediting institution 377 that services the same or a similar service sector or area (e.g., a geographic area) as the downed exchange 394.
connecting, in response to the detection, to a second system and maintaining a prior connection to the second cryptocurrency exchange system;
See Garay [0077] In various implementations, the transaction computing system 300 can identify when a particular exchange 394 is down since transaction quotes, trade instruction messages, digital currency movement to and/or from the downed exchange 394, and payments to the downed exchange 394 may fail.
[0078] As an alternative to queueing the orders in the records database 346, the transaction computing system 300 can bypass the downed exchange 394 to provide quotes to clients, initiate transactions for the clients, and return transaction statuses to the clients when transactions are executed. The transaction computing system 300 can perform such tasks by leveraging the messaging engine 330 to maintain communications with the other exchange 390 (e.g., a functioning counterpart originating exchange), and performing or settling the transaction on-credit. Specifically, the transaction computing system 300 can form partnerships with certain crediting institutions 377 in the same marketplaces as the exchanges 390. Upon identifying that a particular exchange 394 is down, the exchange management engine 325 can trigger the messaging engine 330 to open communications with a corresponding crediting institution 377 that services the same or a similar service sector or area (e.g., a geographic area) as the downed exchange 394.
and completing the cryptocurrency transaction request using the second cryptocurrency exchange system and the second pricing system.
See Garay [0073] Specifically, in the event of a disabled market or exchange 390, the order management module 335 can queue orders in the records database 346, and then release the orders once the market or exchange 390 is reenabled.
[0075] In the event of a downed exchange 394 (e.g., due to scheduled maintenance), the order management module 335 can put a hold on the sub-orders, and queue them in the records database 346 until the downed exchange 394 comes back online.
[0078] As an alternative to queueing the orders in the records database 346, the transaction computing system 300 can bypass the downed exchange 394 to provide quotes to clients, initiate transactions for the clients, and return transaction statuses to the clients when transactions are executed. The transaction computing system 300 can perform such tasks by leveraging the messaging engine 330 to maintain communications with the other exchange 390 (e.g., a functioning counterpart originating exchange), and performing or settling the transaction on-credit. Specifically, the transaction computing system 300 can form partnerships with certain crediting institutions 377 in the same marketplaces as the exchanges 390. Upon identifying that a particular exchange 394 is down, the exchange management engine 325 can trigger the messaging engine 330 to open communications with a corresponding crediting institution 377 that services the same or a similar service sector or area (e.g., a geographic area) as the downed exchange 394
Garay does not explicitly teach:
connecting to a second pricing system;
completing the cryptocurrency transaction request using the second pricing system
Robertson teaches:
connecting to a second pricing system;
completing the cryptocurrency transaction request using the second pricing system
See Robertson [0237] This guarantee innovation may be implemented in several ways. One method is similar to flow diagram FIG. 17C, except that in step 1734 the mortality table is either bounded by the guaranteed mortality table (in the event that the mortality table is allowed to float) or is not changed at all. In Step 1736, the actual LBU's in the unallocated account are compared with the LBU's that have been guaranteed and in Step 1737 transfers to and from the reserve pool ensure the customers achieve the guaranteed LBU allocation outcome. The reserve pool is invested in the same assets as the LBU's will be credited in, ensuring no long term investment risk mismatch.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include in the backup transactions of the primary reference, the ability to use a second pricing system as taught by Robertson since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. Additional motivation includes allowing for the use of a backup asset pool allows for transactions to be completed right away as opposed to waiting.
Regarding Claim 6;
The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 5, wherein the first cryptocurrency exchange system corresponds to a first asset pool for completing cryptocurrency transactions and the second cryptocurrency exchange system corresponds to a second asset pool for completing cryptocurrency transactions.
See Garay [0078] As an alternative to queueing the orders in the records database 346, the transaction computing system 300 can bypass the downed exchange 394 to provide quotes to clients, initiate transactions for the clients, and return transaction statuses to the clients when transactions are executed. The transaction computing system 300 can perform such tasks by leveraging the messaging engine 330 to maintain communications with the other exchange 390 (e.g., a functioning counterpart originating exchange), and performing or settling the transaction on-credit. Specifically, the transaction computing system 300 can form partnerships with certain crediting institutions 377 in the same marketplaces as the exchanges 390. Upon identifying that a particular exchange 394 is down, the exchange management engine 325 can trigger the messaging engine 330 to open communications with a corresponding crediting institution 377 that services the same or a similar service sector or area (e.g., a geographic area) as the downed exchange 394
Regarding Claim 7;
The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 6, wherein completing the cryptocurrency transaction request using the second cryptocurrency exchange system and the second pricing system further comprises completing the cryptocurrency transaction request with the second asset pool based on a price from the second pricing system.
See Garay [0073] Specifically, in the event of a disabled market or exchange 390, the order management module 335 can queue orders in the records database 346, and then release the orders once the market or exchange 390 is reenabled.
[0075] In the event of a downed exchange 394 (e.g., due to scheduled maintenance), the order management module 335 can put a hold on the sub-orders, and queue them in the records database 346 until the downed exchange 394 comes back online.
[0078] As an alternative to queueing the orders in the records database 346, the transaction computing system 300 can bypass the downed exchange 394 to provide quotes to clients, initiate transactions for the clients, and return transaction statuses to the clients when transactions are executed. The transaction computing system 300 can perform such tasks by leveraging the messaging engine 330 to maintain communications with the other exchange 390 (e.g., a functioning counterpart originating exchange), and performing or settling the transaction on-credit. Specifically, the transaction computing system 300 can form partnerships with certain crediting institutions 377 in the same marketplaces as the exchanges 390. Upon identifying that a particular exchange 394 is down, the exchange management engine 325 can trigger the messaging engine 330 to open communications with a corresponding crediting institution 377 that services the same or a similar service sector or area (e.g., a geographic area) as the downed exchange 394
Claims 2, 8, 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gary in view of Roberson as applied to claim 1, 3, and 5-7 above, and further in view of Mateen, US Patent Application No 2014/0074623.
Regarding Claim 2;
The system of claim 1, wherein the instructions further cause the system to perform operations comprising:
completing the cancelled transaction requests with the primary asset pool after reconnecting to the primary cryptocurrency exchange system.
See Garay [0119] To settle the debt with the crediting institution, the computing system 300 can perform a number of functions depending upon which exchange 390 was experiencing downtime. For example, if the downed exchange 394 is the originating exchange, the computing system 300 can monitor the exchange 390 for an online status (730). When the originating exchange 390 comes back online, the computing system 300 can transmit trade instructions to the originating exchange 390 to perform the exchange transaction with the destination exchange 390 in accordance with the examples described herein (735).
Garay does not teach:
detecting the backup asset pool falling below a value threshold; cancelling transaction requests with the backup asset pool;
Mateen teaches:
detecting the backup asset pool falling below a value threshold; cancelling transaction requests with the backup asset pool;
See Mateen [0078] FIG. 9 illustrates a screen for selecting a transaction type 902 between PIN based and CCCA. FIG. 10 illustrates a screen for selecting an account for a withdrawal, checking balance, or transfer 1002. Accounts that may be manipulated include checking, savings and one or more credit cards. FIG. 11 illustrates a screen for informing the user that there are insufficient funds and/or a transaction limit has been exceeded 1102. Options that may be provided to the user include: viewing the user's account balance, obtaining a credit advance and/or a POS sale, a debit advance, and cancelling the transaction. In FIG. 12, the user is provided with balance and transaction options 1202.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include in the backup transactions of the primary reference, the ability to detect if the backup pool has sufficient funds as taught by Mateen since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. Additional motivation includes checking to see if there are sufficient funds prevents unnecessary transactions.
Regarding Claim 8;
Garay does not teach this limitation
Mateen teaches:
The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 6, further comprising instructions for:
monitoring the second asset pool for crossing a value limit; and
providing a notification in response to the second asset pool crossing the value limit.
See Mateen [0078] FIG. 9 illustrates a screen for selecting a transaction type 902 between PIN based and CCCA. FIG. 10 illustrates a screen for selecting an account for a withdrawal, checking balance, or transfer 1002. Accounts that may be manipulated include checking, savings and one or more credit cards. FIG. 11 illustrates a screen for informing the user that there are insufficient funds and/or a transaction limit has been exceeded 1102. Options that may be provided to the user include: viewing the user's account balance, obtaining a credit advance and/or a POS sale, a debit advance, and cancelling the transaction. In FIG. 12, the user is provided with balance and transaction options 1202.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include in the backup transactions of the primary reference, the ability to detect if the backup pool has sufficient funds as taught by Mateen since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. Additional motivation includes checking to see if there are sufficient funds prevents unnecessary transactions.
Regarding Claim 9;
Garay does not teach this limitation
Mateen teaches:
The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 8, further comprising instructions for pausing the cryptocurrency transaction request to prevent the second asset pool from crossing the value limit.
See Mateen [0078] FIG. 9 illustrates a screen for selecting a transaction type 902 between PIN based and CCCA. FIG. 10 illustrates a screen for selecting an account for a withdrawal, checking balance, or transfer 1002. Accounts that may be manipulated include checking, savings and one or more credit cards. FIG. 11 illustrates a screen for informing the user that there are insufficient funds and/or a transaction limit has been exceeded 1102. Options that may be provided to the user include: viewing the user's account balance, obtaining a credit advance and/or a POS sale, a debit advance, and cancelling the transaction. In FIG. 12, the user is provided with balance and transaction options 1202.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include in the backup transactions of the primary reference, the ability to detect if the backup pool has sufficient funds as taught by Mateen since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. Additional motivation includes checking to see if there are sufficient funds prevents unnecessary transactions.
Claims 4, 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gary in view of Roberson as applied to claim 1, 3, and 5-7 above, and further in view of Winklevoss, US Patent No 10,269,009.
Regarding Claim 4;
Garay does not teach this limitation
Winklevoss teaches:
The system of claim 1, wherein the instructions further cause the system to perform operations comprising disconnecting, in response to reconnecting to the primary cryptocurrency exchange system, from the backup cryptocurrency exchange system.
See Winklevoss (Col 16, In 35-50) Different wallet clients may be provided, which may offer different performance and/or features in terms of, e.g., security, backup options, connectivity to banks or digital asset exchanges, user interface, and/or speed, to name a few.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include in the backup system of the primary reference, the ability to disconnect as taught by Winklevoss since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. Additional motivation includes disconnecting from the backup system allow for the conservation of resources.
Regarding Claim 10;
The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 6, further comprising instructions for:
detecting an available connection with the first cryptocurrency exchange system; reconnecting to the first cryptocurrency exchange system;
See Garay [0119] To settle the debt with the crediting institution, the computing system 300 can perform a number of functions depending upon which exchange 390 was experiencing downtime. For example, if the downed exchange 394 is the originating exchange, the computing system 300 can monitor the exchange 390 for an online status (730). When the originating exchange 390 comes back online, the computing system 300 can transmit trade instructions to the originating exchange 390 to perform the exchange transaction with the destination exchange 390 in accordance with the examples described herein (735).
performing a settlement transaction between the first asset pool and the second asset pool based on the completed cryptocurrency transaction request;
See Garay [0088] Numerous variations of settling with the crediting institution 377 are also contemplated. For example, the transaction service implemented by the transaction computing system 300 can comprise a funding account at the crediting institution 377, which can be utilized by the exchange management engine 325 to settle funds with the receiving client or to settle an on-credit transaction by the crediting institution 377. In one example, the order management engine 335 can track the transaction flows of all on-credit transactions in its internal records 346 and/or as published on the decentralized ledger 370. At a settlement interval (e.g., once a week), the exchange management engine 325 can settle the final on-credit transaction amounts at each crediting institution 377 holding a credit balance.
[0119] To settle the debt with the crediting institution, the computing system 300 can perform a number of functions depending upon which exchange 390 was experiencing downtime. For example, if the downed exchange 394 is the originating exchange, the computing system 300 can monitor the exchange 390 for an online status (730). When the originating exchange 390 comes back online, the computing system 300 can transmit trade instructions to the originating exchange 390 to perform the exchange transaction with the destination exchange 390 in accordance with the examples described herein (735).
Garay does not teach:
and disconnecting from the second cryptocurrency exchange system.
Winklevoss teaches:
and disconnecting from the second cryptocurrency exchange system.
See Winklevoss (Col 16, In 35-50) Different wallet clients may be provided, which may offer different performance and/or features in terms of, e.g., security, backup options, connectivity to banks or digital asset exchanges, user interface, and/or speed, to name a few.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include in the backup system of the primary reference, the ability to disconnect as taught by Winklevoss since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. Additional motivation includes disconnecting from the backup system allow for the conservation of resources.
Prior Art
There was no prior art rejection on file for claims 11-20. Examiner has conducted an updated prior art search in view of the new claims and will not provide an art rejection at this time.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL J WARDEN whose telephone number is (571)272-9602. The examiner can normally be reached M-F; 9-6 CDT.
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, Bennett M Sigmond can be reached at 303-297-4411. 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.
/MICHAEL J. WARDEN/
Examiner
Art Unit 3694
/BENNETT M SIGMOND/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3694