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 .
Status of Claims
This is the office action on the merits in response to the application filed on 12/29/2025.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been examined.
Response to Arguments
1. Applicant's arguments filed 12/29/2025 with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-20 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The previous rejection (and corresponding rejections to its dependent claims) is withdrawn.
The rejection of pending claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. 101 as directed to an abstract idea without significantly more, is maintained in view of MPEP 2106.04(a). The claims are still directed to an abstract idea. The claims recite to receiving one or more token minting transaction requests from one or more developers; grouping the one or more token minting transaction requests from one or more developers into one or more groups according to contract type and contract address; and sending each of the one or more groups of token minting transaction requests to an appropriate token contract for minting. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the steps above amount to collecting, organizing, and routing transaction information. which falls under organizing human activity (i.e., as fundamental economic practices). The additional elements of the claims merely recite generic computer components that perform routine functions of receiving, grouping, and sending data, which does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Therefore, the rejection under 35 USC § 101 is maintained. See remarks on page 6-7.
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 a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Subject Matter Eligibility Criteria – Step 1:
Claims 1-6 are directed to a method, claims 7-13 are directed to an article of manufacture, and claims 14-20 are directed an apparatus. Therefore, these claims fall within the four statutory categories of invention.
Subject Matter Eligibility Criteria – Step 2A – Prong One:
Regarding Prong One of Step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test, the claim limitations are to be analyzed to determine whether, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, they “recite” a judicial exception or in other words whether a judicial exception is “set forth” or “described” in the claims. MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(1). An “abstract idea” judicial exception is subject matter that falls within at least one of the following groups: a) certain methods of organizing human activity, b) mental processes, and/or c) mathematical concepts. MPEP 2106.04(a).
Representative independents claims 1, 7, and 14 include limitations that recite at least one abstract idea.
Claims 1, 7, and 14 are directed to the abstract idea of “ receiving one or more token minting transaction requests from one or more developers; grouping the one or more token minting transaction requests from one or more developers into one or more groups according to contract type and contract address; and sending each of the one or more groups of token minting transaction requests to an appropriate token contract for minting.” Under its broadest reasonable interpretation, this claim is collecting and sorting token minting transaction requests and sending the requests to smart contracts, and hence falls under organizing human activity (i.e., as fundamental economic practices).
Dependent Claims:
Claims 2, 8, and 15 recites: wherein the appropriate token contracts are configured to send the minted tokens to an escrow wallet; further describes the abstract idea of organizing human activity (i.e., as fundamental economic practices).
Claims 3, 9, 16 recites: wherein the appropriate token contracts are configured to send the minted tokens directly to an end user wallet; further describes the abstract idea of organizing human activity (i.e., as fundamental economic practices).
Claims 4, 10, and 17 recites: wherein at least one of the token contract types comprises: ERC 721 or ERC 1155; further describes the abstract idea of organizing human activity (i.e., as fundamental economic practices).
Claims 5, 11, and 18 recites: wherein the grouping of the one or more token minting transaction requests is performed by one or more long running workers (LRWs); further describes the abstract idea of organizing human activity (i.e., as fundamental economic practices).
Claims 6, 12, and 19 recites: wherein a separate LRW is assigned to each token contract type; further describes the abstract idea of organizing human activity (i.e., as fundamental economic practices).
Claims 13 and 20 recites: wherein the instructions stored on the non-transitory computer-readable medium comprise a software development kit (SDK); further describes the abstract idea of organizing human activity (i.e., as fundamental economic practices).
Subject Matter Eligibility Criteria – Step 2A – Prong Two:
Claim 1, 7, and 14 recites to an electronic device using the one or more processors and memory as additional elements to the judicial exception in the preamble. Viewed individually and in combination, this additional element to the identified judicial exception of Step 2A.1, amounts to no more than mere instructions for collecting and sorting token minting transaction requests and sending the requests to smart contracts on a generic computer. Therefore, at Step 2A.2, these additional elements do not act in combination to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The additional elements of claims 1, 7, and 14 considered both individually and as an ordered combination, do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional element of a generic computer does no more than “[s]imply appending well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality, to the judicial exception, e.g., a claim to an abstract idea requiring no more than a generic computer to perform generic computer functions that are well-understood, routine and conventional activities previously known to the industry.” See MPEP 2106.05 (citing to Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int'l, 573 U.S. 208, 225 (2014)).
Therefore claims 1, 7, and 14 is found ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Step 2B:
Viewed as a whole, instructions/method claims recite the concept of “organizing human activity” (i.e., as fundamental economic practices) in collecting and sorting token minting transaction requests and sending the requests to smart contracts are performed by a generic computer. The method claims do not, for example, purport to improve the functioning of the computer itself. Nor do they effect an improvement in any other technology or technical field. Instead, the claims at issue amount to nothing significantly more than an instruction to apply the abstract idea using some unspecified, generic computer. See Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd., 573 U.S. 208. Mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component and limitations to a particular field of use or technological environment cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application at Step 2A or provide an inventive concept in Step 2B. The use of a computer server is to merely automate and/or implement the abstract idea cannot provide significantly more than the abstract idea itself (MPEP 2106.05(I)(A)(f) & (h)). Therefore, the claim is not patent eligible.
Statement Regarding the Prior Art
The prior art does not teach or suggest the following:
grouping the one or more token minting transaction requests from one or more developers into one or more groups according to contract type and contract address;
and sending each of the one or more groups of token minting transaction requests to an appropriate token contract for minting.
Xia et al. US 11132676 (herein as “Xia”) discloses Implementations of this specification include identify a plurality of transactions to be executed in the blockchain, wherein the transactions are arranged in an execution order, and wherein the execution order includes a contract call arranged after the plurality of transactions; identify groups of transactions within the plurality of transactions, wherein each transaction in each group is associated with a same account in the blockchain network as the other transactions in the group; instruct nodes of the blockchain network to execute each of the groups of transactions in parallel, wherein executing each group of transactions includes executing the transactions within the group serially and according to the execution order; determine that the nodes of the blockchain network have completed executing all of the groups of transactions; and in response, instruct the nodes of the blockchain network to execute the contract call. However, Xia does not disclose or suggest grouping the one or more token minting transaction requests from one or more developers into one or more groups according to contract type and contract address. Rather, Xia discloses identifying groups of transactions and executing the groups in parallel, not based on smart contract types or addresses.
Fortuna et al. US 20240104552 (herein as “Fortuna”) discloses methods and processes for faster and more efficient creation of NFTs while further enhancing the use and transferability of digital assets along with, or in conjunction with, tangible goods and other physical real world assets; methods for securing personal keys that allow for improved security of the physical key while simultaneously providing for transferability of the underlying digital assets; and methods for creation and activation of digital wallets, digital assets, and/or digital asset backed gift cards and the like. However, Fortuna does not disclose or suggest grouping or organizing token minting transaction requests into groups according to contract types with ERC standards and specific contract addresses for processing. Rather, Fortuna discloses organizing and creating assets using smart contacts, it does not distinguish or group transactions based on different smart contract types (ERC standards) or specific contract addresses.
Therefore, the prior art, whether alone or in combination, does not teach or suggest the claimed invention.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Non-Custodial Tool for Building Decentralized Computer Applications (US 20210092108 A1) teaches a mechanism for building decentralized computer applications that execute on a distributed computing system. The present technology works within a web browser, client application, or other software and provides access to decentralized computer applications through the browser. The present technology is non-custodial, wherein a public-private key pair, which represents user identity, is created on a client machine and then directly encrypted by a third-party platform without relying on one centralized computing system.
In addition to the foregoing, other aspects are described in the claims, drawings, and text. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Davida L. King whose telephone number is (571) 272-4724. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm.
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, Neha Patel can be reached on (571) 270-1492. 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.
/D.L.K./Examiner, Art Unit 3699
/COURTNEY P JONES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3699