Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
2. This Non-Final Office action is in response to the application filed on August 23rd, 2024. Claims 1-10 are pending.
Priority
3. Application 18/841,247 was filed on August 23rd, 2024 which is a 371 of PCT/BR2023/050061 filed on February 24th, 2023 which claims priority to foreign application BRAZIL 1020220036977 filed on February 25th, 2022.
Examiner Request
4. 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 U.S.C. §112(a) or §112 1st paragraph issues that can arise when claims are amended without support in the specification. The Examiner thanks the Applicant in advance.
Claim Objections
5. Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 2 recites “a processor, data storage memory, embedded software to process data…” Examiner notes that it should recite “a processor, data storage memory, and embedded software to process data…”
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
6. Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. Claims 1-10 are directed to a system, method, or product which are/is one of the statutory categories of invention. (Step 1: YES).
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Claim 1 recites:
[…] integrated system for measuring physical quantities and issuing […] assets or tokens associated with environmental conservation and sustainability metrics characterized in that they comprise:
[…] measuring physical entities/quantities associated with the sustainability, conservation, or recovery of environmental assets, providing environmental conservation metrics; and
a […] registration process of metrics and the issuance of […] assets ballasted by said metrics.
These limitations as drafted are processes that, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, covers certain methods of organizing human activity (i.e., commercial or legal interactions including agreements in the form of contracts, legal obligations and business relations) but for recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting devices, digital assets, and distributed or blockchain digital registration, the claimed invention merely recite managing and administering conservation credits through token issuance, including measuring and recording metrics as part of that management, the abstract idea stated above. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers commercial or legal interactions but for the recitation of generic computer components (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II)), then it falls within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, Claim 1 recites an abstract idea. (Step 2A- Prong 1: YES. The claims recite an abstract idea).
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. Claim 1 recites the additional elements of devices, digital assets, and distributed or blockchain digital registration. These additional elements are not described by the applicant and are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., generic computer components performing generic computer functions) such that they amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer components. 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. Claim 1 is directed to an abstract idea without a practical application. (Step 2A-Prong 2: NO: the additional claimed elements are not integrated into a practical application).
Claim 1 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more (also known as an “inventive concept”) than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of devices, digital assets, and distributed or blockchain digital registration to perform the noted steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept (“significantly more”). Accordingly, even when considered separately and as an ordered combination, nothing in the claim adds significantly more (i.e. an inventive concept) to the abstract idea. Thus claim 1 is not patent eligible. (Step 2B: NO. The claims do not provide significantly more).
Dependent claims 2-10 are similarly rejected because they merely further narrow the same abstract idea of independent claims 1 and/or do not further limit the claim to a practical application or provide as inventive concept such that the claims are subject matter eligible even when considered individually or as an ordered combination.
Claim 2 merely describes process data of measured quantities and transform them into information to be stored through tokenizing the quantity of the measured quantity. Claim 2 also includes the additional elements of a processor, data storage memory, embedded software, and blockchain. These additional elements are again recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., generic computers performing generic computer functions) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer components. Even in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
Claims 3 and 7 merely describe the composition of the device of claim 1 that was treated as an additional element above to include the details of a processing capacity, data storage and embedded computer program/software, an electronic board equipped with sensors, one or more physical and logical interfaces, and a network interface. These additional element details are again recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., generic computers performing generic computer functions) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer components, more specifically generic measurement hardware. Even in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
Claims 4 and 8 merely describes performing computations, and obtaining quantities read directly. Claims 4 and 8 also includes the additional elements of computer programming code installed in the validating nodes. These additional elements are again recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., generic computers performing generic computer functions) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer components. Even in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
Claims 5 and 9 includes the additional element of “that it is installed on the validating nodes (computers) of an XRP Ledger blockchain network in the form of an independent software package or in the form of a computer code patch applied to the open-source code of the XRP Ledger” which generally links the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. MPEP 2106.04(d)(I) and MPEP 2106.05(A) indicate that merely “generally linking” the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use cannot provide a practical application or significantly more
Claims 6 and 10 merely describe tokenized metrics of Conservation Credits related to the electricity savings obtained through the use of energy-efficient blockchain technology when compared to other blockchain technologies and applications which further defines the abstract idea. Examiner notes that the limitations directed to “energy-efficient blockchain technology” do not provide any technical detail or mechanism as to how such efficiencies are achieved. Merely claiming the outcome of improved energy efficiency, absent a specific improvement in how the blockchain network itself is structured or operates is a result-oriented limitation that does not transform the abstract idea into an eligible application.
Therefore claims 1-10 are patent ineligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
7. Claims 2-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Where applicant acts as his or her own lexicographer to specifically define a term of a claim contrary to its ordinary meaning, the written description must clearly redefine the claim term and set forth the uncommon definition so as to put one reasonably skilled in the art on notice that the applicant intended to so redefine that claim term. Process Control Corp. v. HydReclaim Corp., 190 F.3d 1350, 1357, 52 USPQ2d 1029, 1033 (Fed. Cir. 1999). The term “ballasted” in claim 1 has the accepted meaning of “to give stability to (a ship) by putting a heavy substance in its bilge,” however this is not the way in which the claim utilizes the meaning of “ballasted. The term is indefinite because the specification does not clearly redefine the term.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
8. Claims 1-3 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Thompson (US2020/0097950).
As per claim 1
Thompson discloses device and integrated system for measuring physical quantities and issuing digital assets or tokens associated with environmental conservation and sustainability metrics characterized in that they comprise (paragraphs [0004]: a distributed ledger-based system and methods relating to a consensus-based technique for the authorized generation of tokens associated with measurable real-world assets, such as renewable electricity by way of non-limiting example, and [0005]: The real-world asset generating device can be adapted to measure quantifiable amounts of the real-world asset that is generates. By way of non-limiting example, a renewable energy generator can include a meter adapted to measure a defined amount of renewable energy (e.g., 1 kilowatt) generated by way of its renewable energy source (e.g., sun, wind, water). The computing device can, based on a determination that the defined amount of the real-world asset has been generated, generate a first transaction that includes a first request to generate a digital token asset that corresponds to the determined generated real-world asset).
one or more devices for measuring physical entities/quantities associated with the sustainability, conservation, or recovery of environmental assets, providing environmental conservation metrics (paragraph [0045]: A renewable energy generator 235 can include a set of solar panels, a set of hydropower turbines, a set of wind turbines, any other set of renewable energy generators, or any combination thereof. In various embodiments, a real-world asset generating device can include or be coupled to a monitoring device, capable of determining a quantifiable amount of the real-world asset being generated thereby. For example, renewable energy generator 235 can include or be coupled to an electricity meter for determining an amount of electricity being generated by renewable energy generator 235. In this regard, the unprivileged client 230A can determine when a defined amount (e.g., 1 kilowatt hour) of the real-world asset is generated, and based on the determination, generate a transaction, including a request to generate a corresponding digital token, that is digitally signed with a unique identifier (e.g., associated with the client 230A or associated with the real-world asset generating device); and
a distributed or blockchain digital registration process of metrics and the issuance of digital assets ballasted by said metrics (paragraph [0028]: The transaction is not finalized (i.e., added to the blockchain), however, until the transfer is validated by a consensus of the nodes 110A-110F in the distributed ledger network 100 and [0045]: The unprivileged client 230A can then transmit the generated and digitally-signed transaction to any of the distributed nodes 110N for storage onto the blockchain).
As per claim 2
Thompson discloses the device, according to claim 1, characterized in that it comprises: a processor, data storage memory, and embedded software to process data of said measured quantities and transform them into information to be stored in the blockchain through the process of tokenizing the quantity of the measured quantity (paragraphs [0024]: Various functions described herein as being performed by one or more entities may be carried out by hardware, firmware, and/or software. For instance, various functions may be carried out by a processor executing instructions stored in memory and [0045]: In various embodiments, a real-world asset generating device can include or be coupled to a monitoring device, capable of determining a quantifiable amount of the real-world asset being generated thereby. For example, renewable energy generator 235 can include or be coupled to an electricity meter for determining an amount of electricity being generated by renewable energy generator 235. In this regard, the unprivileged client 230A can determine when a defined amount (e.g., 1 kilowatt hour) of the real-world asset is generated, and based on the determination, generate a transaction, including a request to generate a corresponding digital token, that is digitally signed with a unique identifier (e.g., associated with the client 230A or associated with the real-world asset generating device). The unprivileged client 230A can then transmit the generated and digitally-signed transaction to any of the distributed nodes 110N for storage onto the blockchain).
As per claims 3 and 7
Thompson discloses the device characterized in that it comprises: a Joker (see Examiner’s note below) base device (A) with processing capacity, data storage and embedded computer program/software (paragraphs [0024]: Various functions described herein as being performed by one or more entities may be carried out by hardware, firmware, and/or software. For instance, various functions may be carried out by a processor executing instructions stored in memory and paragraph [0005]: The real-world asset generating device can be adapted to measure quantifiable amounts of the real-world asset that is generates. By way of non-limiting example, a renewable energy generator can include a meter adapted to measure a defined amount of renewable energy (e.g., 1 kilowatt) generated by way of its renewable energy source (e.g., sun, wind, water). The computing device can, based on a determination that the defined amount of the real-world asset has been generated, generate a first transaction that includes a first request to generate a digital token asset that corresponds to the determined generated real-world asset); Examiner notes that applicant’s specification defines the term “Joker” as “a versatile and adaptable device for measuring quantities related to real metrices of environmental conservation and/or sustainability” which is taught by Thompson (see above).
an electronic board (E), equipped with sensors for measuring physical quantities (Figure 4 and paragraph [0059] and paragraph [0021]: In various industries, computing devices can be coupled to electric, mechanical, or electro-mechanical devices that generate measured or measurable amounts of real-world assets. By way of a non-limiting example, the renewable energy sector is one industry that utilizes such devices. A renewable energy generator can generate electricity from a renewable energy source, such as the sun, wind, or running water, among other things. Renewable energy generators can include meters, that are adapted to measure real world assets (i.e., amounts of electricity) being generated by a renewable energy generator harnessing a renewable energy source. Renewable energy is one of many industries that can employ computing devices coupled to electric, mechanical, or a combination of both (each hereinafter referred to as electro-mechanical devices) to accurately measure quantifiable amounts of real-world assets being generated.),
one or more physical and logical interfaces (B), to provide communication (D) between the Joker processing unit (A) and the board processing unit (E) (paragraph [0059]: The renewable energy generator can include a memory 410, a communications component 420, and an asset generation metering module 430, among other things. The memory 410 can include a cache, a storage device, or any other computer memory operable to store temporarily or permanently a measured reading of a real-world asset being generated by the renewable energy generator 235. The communications component 420 can be an interfacing module, such as a serial port, USB port, wireless communications device, modem, or other I/O port that can couple the renewable energy generator 235 to an unprivileged client device, such as unprivileged client device 230A of FIG. 2. The asset generation metering module 430 can monitor measurable readings of the real-world asset being generated. By way of example, the asset generation metering module 430 can include an electricity metering module that measures how many units (e.g., kilowatts) of electricity is being generated by the renewable energy generator 235. The measured units of the real-world asset (e.g., electricity) generated by the renewable energy generator 235 can be stored to the memory 410 and/or communicated to a receiving client device, such as unprivileged client device 230A of FIG. 2, via the communications component 420); and
a network interface (C) that uses network communication media (J) to access a local computer network or the internet (1) and communicate with nodes (K) of a blockchain network (paragraph [0025]: The distributed ledger network 100 depicted in FIG. 1 includes a plurality of nodes 110A-110F that are each in communication with one or more nodes 110A-110F over a network 120, such as the Internet, a LAN, a WAN, a telecommunications network, or the like. In accordance with the present disclosure, each node 110A-110F is a node of a distributed ledger network, whereby each node can be a hardware device and/or a component of a computing device later described in accordance with FIG. 9. In some embodiments, and preferably for public blockchain implementations, each node 110A-110F in the distributed ledger network 100 can operate as a peer to every other node 110A-110F of the distributed ledger network 110 such that no single node 110A-110F is more influential or powerful than any other node 110A-110F. Operations performed by nodes can include, among other things, validating transactions, verifying blocks of transactions, and adding records to an immutable database that is collectively maintained by the nodes 110A-110F).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
9. Claims 4-6 and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thompson (US2020/0097950), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Roma and Hasan (“Energy Consumption Analysis of XRP Validator,” University of Waterloo, 2020).
As per claims 4 and 8
Thompson teaches the device characterized in that it comprises: a Joker (see Examiner’s note below) in the form of a computer programming code or in the form of software (for measuring environmental or physical metrics and generating tokenized values on a blockchain) (paragraphs [0024]: Various functions described herein as being performed by one or more entities may be carried out by hardware, firmware, and/or software. For instance, various functions may be carried out by a processor executing instructions stored in memory and paragraph [0005]: The real-world asset generating device can be adapted to measure quantifiable amounts of the real-world asset that is generates. By way of non-limiting example, a renewable energy generator can include a meter adapted to measure a defined amount of renewable energy (e.g., 1 kilowatt) generated by way of its renewable energy source (e.g., sun, wind, water). The computing device can, based on a determination that the defined amount of the real-world asset has been generated, generate a first transaction that includes a first request to generate a digital token asset that corresponds to the determined generated real-world asset). Examiner notes that applicant’s specification defines the term “Joker” as “a versatile and adaptable device for measuring quantities related to real metrices of environmental conservation and/or sustainability” which is taught by Thompson (see above).
Thompson does not specifically teach a device for measuring the electrical power input of the computer that performs computations, obtaining from the device's primary memory the quantities read from the medium and computing the electrical power consumption metrics of the validating nodes (computers) of the XRP Ledger blockchain network OR the code is installed in the validating nodes (computers) participating in the XRP Ledger blockchain network, which performs computations, obtaining from the primary memory of the computer where it is installed the quantities read directly from its motherboard the XRP Ledger blockchain network.
Roma and Hasan teaches device for measuring the electrical power input of the computer that performs computations, obtaining from the device's primary memory the quantities read from the medium and computing the electrical power consumption metrics of the validating nodes (computers) of the XRP Ledger blockchain network OR the code is installed in the validating nodes (computers) participating in the XRP Ledger blockchain network, which performs computations, obtaining from the primary memory of the computer where it is installed the quantities read directly from its motherboard the XRP Ledger blockchain network (Pages 1-2: CPU Energy Meter is used to capture the process-level energy [5]. It is a linux-based tool which reads power statistics from the Running Average Power Limit (RAPL) domain and thus, requires no extra hardware).
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 Ledger blockchain network of Thompson to include a device for measuring the electrical power input of the computer that performs computations, obtaining from the device's primary memory the quantities read from the medium and computing the electrical power consumption metrics of the validating nodes (computers) of the XRP Ledger blockchain network OR the code is installed in the validating nodes (computers) participating in the XRP Ledger blockchain network, which performs computations, obtaining from the primary memory of the computer where it is installed the quantities read directly from its motherboard the XRP Ledger blockchain network as taught by Roma and Hasan to quantify the cost to run this node (abstract)
As per claims 5 and 9
Thompson does not specifically teach the device, characterized in that it is installed on the validating nodes (computers) of an XRPLedger blockchain network in the form of an independent software package or in the form of a computer code patch applied to the open-source code of the Ledger .
Roma and Hasan teaches the device, characterized in that it is installed on the validating nodes (computers) of an XRPLedger blockchain network in the form of an independent software package or in the form of a computer code patch applied to the open-source code of the Ledger (Pages 1-2: The XRP Ledger is a decentralized cryptographic ledger powered by a network of peer-to-peer servers running the rippled software).
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 Ledger blockchain network of Thompson to include the device, characterized in that it is installed on the validating nodes (computers) of an XRPLedger blockchain network in the form of an independent software package or in the form of a computer code patch applied to the open-source code of the Ledger as taught by Roma and Hasan because XRPL’s open-source nature expressly permits modification (page 1-2).
As per claims 6 and 10
Thompson discloses the device, characterized in that it provides tokenized metrics of Conservation Credits related to the electricity savings (paragraphs [0024]: Various functions described herein as being performed by one or more entities may be carried out by hardware, firmware, and/or software. For instance, various functions may be carried out by a processor executing instructions stored in memory and paragraph [0005]: The real-world asset generating device can be adapted to measure quantifiable amounts of the real-world asset that is generates. By way of non-limiting example, a renewable energy generator can include a meter adapted to measure a defined amount of renewable energy (e.g., 1 kilowatt) generated by way of its renewable energy source (e.g., sun, wind, water). The computing device can, based on a determination that the defined amount of the real-world asset has been generated, generate a first transaction that includes a first request to generate a digital token asset that corresponds to the determined generated real-world asset).
Thompson does not specifically teach the electricity savings are obtained through the use of energy-efficient blockchain technology when compared to other blockchain technologies and applications.
Roma and Hasan teaches the electricity savings are obtained through the use of energy-efficient blockchain technology when compared to other blockchain technologies and applications (Conclusion: This work shows that it is advantageous for XRP validator hosts to customize their installation based on their desired performance and use case. It also demonstrates that the electricity cost to run an XRP validator is low and this can encourage greater participation in the XRP Ledger network by the general public and private businesses).
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 Ledger blockchain network of Thompson to include the electricity savings are obtained through the use of energy-efficient blockchain technology when compared to other blockchain technologies and applications as taught by Roma and Hasan to quantify efficiency relative to other blockchains to provide a more persuasive basis for tokenization and public adoption (conclusion).
Conclusion
10. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Diaz (US2021/0216978) which discloses a footprint management system (sustainability footprint management system).
Mitch (US2023/0134095) which discloses distributing preferred energy tokens.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA LEMIEUX whose telephone number is (571)270-3445. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7AM-3PM.
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, Jessica Lemieux can be reached at 571-270-3445. 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.
/JESSICA LEMIEUX/
Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3626
Prosecution Insights