Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/814,369

DISTRIBUTED LEDGER BASED SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DIGITAL VOUCHER CREATION, MANAGEMENT, AND TRANSACTIONS IN A SUPPLY CHAIN

Final Rejection §101
Filed
Aug 23, 2024
Examiner
TURK, BROCK E
Art Unit
3692
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Codehost Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
29%
Grant Probability
At Risk
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
64%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 29% of cases
29%
Career Allow Rate
44 granted / 151 resolved
-22.9% vs TC avg
Strong +35% interview lift
Without
With
+35.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
62 currently pending
Career history
213
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
40.4%
+0.4% vs TC avg
§103
32.0%
-8.0% vs TC avg
§102
9.2%
-30.8% vs TC avg
§112
14.4%
-25.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 151 resolved cases

Office Action

§101
DETAILED ACTION Status of Claims This action is in reply to amendment and response filed on 11/12/25. Claims 1-14 were cancelled. Claim 15 was amended. Claims 15-20 are pending and examined. Response to Arguments 101: The Applicant’s amendments and arguments have been fully considered but are not persuasive. The Applicant essentially argues that the amended claims do not recite an abstract idea. The Examiner disagrees. The Applicant’s arguments are moot due to substantive amendments. Per example, claim 15 recites “implementing a marketplace for transactions associated with the digital voucher, where the marketplace is blockchain-based and is configured to facilitate a sale of the digital voucher from a seller to a buyer” which includes additional elements (e.g.: the marketplace is blockchain-based). Therefore, the amendments necessitate reconsideration of the claims. As such, an updated rejection is provided that addresses the amended claims. 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 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. (Step 1) The claims recite a process (claim 15). For the purposes of this analysis, representative claim 8 is addressed. (Step 2A, prong 1) Abstract ideas are in bold below, and represent organizing human activity as a method of verifying a user and facilitating a sale of a financial asset associated with the user, as are all a form of commercial or legal interactions. obtaining from an interface a request to generate a digital voucher, where the request is obtained from a user that is authenticated and authorized by an encryption component; in response to authenticating and authorizing the user, deploying the digital voucher on a distributed ledger; implementing a marketplace for transactions associated with the digital voucher, where the marketplace is blockchain-based and is configured to facilitate a sale of the digital voucher from a seller to a buyer; in response to a redemption of the digital voucher, destroying the digital voucher and removing the digital voucher from the distributed ledger. (Step 2A prong 2) The additional elements are as follows: “from an interface”, “digital [voucher]”. This is general linking as “from an interface”, “digital” do no more than link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. “authenticated […] by an encryption component”. This is merely “apply it” as the authenticating by an encryption component is claimed at a high level of generality, receives the information, performs the abstract idea, and outputs the results. “deploying the digital voucher on a distributed ledger”. This is merely “apply it” as deploying is claimed at a high level of generality, receives the information, performs the abstract idea, and outputs the results. This is also general linking as “deploying … on a distributed ledger” does no more than link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. “[the marketplace] is blockchain-based”. This is also general linking as “is blockchain-based” does no more than link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. “removing the digital voucher from the distributed ledger”. This is merely “apply it” as removing is claimed at a high level of generality, receives the information, performs the abstract idea, and outputs the results. (Step 2B) The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration into a practical application, the additional elements amount do no more than provide mere instructions to apply the abstract idea of using generic computer components. The claim elements when considered separately and in an ordered combination, do not add significantly more than implementing the abstract idea of verifying a user and facilitating a sale of a financial asset associated with the user, over a generic computer network with generic computing elements, and generic hardware. Analysis of dependent claims 16-18, recited additional details which only further narrow the abstract idea and do not add any additional features, alone or in combination, that would provide a practical application or provide significantly more. Analysis of dependent claim 19, recited “automatically deploying a smart contract on the distributed ledger in response to a predefined condition being satisfied, where the smart contract is configured to execute operations associated with the digital voucher”, additional details which further narrow the abstract idea and additional elements. The additional elements are as follows: “automatically deploying a smart contract on the distributed ledger […] where the smart contract is configured to execute operations associated with the digital voucher”. This is merely “apply it” as automatically deploying the smart contract and the smart contract executing operations are claimed at a high level of generality, receives the information, performs the abstract idea, and outputs the results. Furthermore, this is also general linking as the “distributed ledger” and the “smart contract” do no more than link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration into a practical application, the additional elements amount do no more than provide mere instructions to apply the abstract idea of using generic computer components. The claim elements when considered separately and in an ordered combination, do not add significantly more than implementing the abstract idea of exchanging assets, over a generic computer network with generic computing elements, and generic hardware. Analysis of dependent claim 20, recited “wherein the digital voucher is stored in a digital wallet and the digital wallet is used for transactions in the marketplace”, additional details which further narrow the abstract idea and additional elements. The additional elements are as follows: “the digital voucher is stored in a digital wallet and the digital wallet is used”. This is merely “apply it” as storing in a digital wallet is claimed at a high level of generality, receives the information, performs the abstract idea, and outputs the results. Furthermore, this is also general linking as the “digital wallet is used” does no more than link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration into a practical application, the additional elements amount do no more than provide mere instructions to apply the abstract idea of using generic computer components. The claim elements when considered separately and in an ordered combination, do not add significantly more than implementing the abstract idea of exchanging assets, over a generic computer network with generic computing elements, and generic hardware. Conclusion Reference, made of record, not relied upon, pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure, includes US 20230368189 A1 (Ambrose) disclosing purchasing customized non-fungible tokens. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BROCK E TURK whose telephone number is (571)272-5626. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-5PM EST. 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, Ryan Donlon can be reached at 571-270-3602. 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. /BROCK E TURK/Examiner, Art Unit 3692 /RYAN D DONLON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3692
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 23, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 09, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §101
Nov 12, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 29, 2025
Final Rejection — §101 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12367467
INTEGRATED INTERACTIVE ELEMENTS FOR MULTI-USER TRANSACTIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Jul 22, 2025
Patent 12354161
POWER GENERATION PLANT OPERATION ASSISTANCE SYSTEM AND POWER GENERATION PLANT CONTROL SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Jul 08, 2025
Patent 12333534
IDENTITY ECOSYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Jun 17, 2025
Patent 12293370
METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR ENHANCING PURCHASE EXPERIENCE VIA AUDIO WEB-RECORDING
2y 5m to grant Granted May 06, 2025
Patent 12260382
Exchanging Physical Cash With An Electronic Funds Account
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 25, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
29%
Grant Probability
64%
With Interview (+35.1%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 151 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month