Objection to the Specification
1. The new title of the invention is still not descriptive. It merely states a computer program without mentioning any purpose or functionality. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Non-Art Rejection
2. 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 therefore, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title".
3. Claims 1 and 3-13 are not directed to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter. The claimed element’s “a program ..to perform first process” is non-structural limitations, and in light of the specification these can be implemented as software. Therefore, the claimed subject matter as a whole fails to fall within the definition of a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter, patentable eligible category subject matter.
The claim may be amended by adding specific structural hardware elements.
Art Rejection
4. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
5. Claims 1-2, 4, 6 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being clearly anticipated by Parikh, U.S. pat. No. 11,552,799.
Per claim 1, Parikh discloses a program, e.g., browser program 140a, that causes a computer of a user terminal to perform a first process based on an acquisition request generated by the user terminal having a digital wallet or without a digital wallet to acquire a token that can be circulated on a blockchain network (see col 2, ln 20-43 and col 3, ln 34-57), wherein the first process generates predetermined information, e.g., digital wallet information, that enables acquisition or management of the token without using the user’s wallet and stores the predetermined information in a predetermined storage area pertaining to a server, e.g., TLM 160 (see col 4, ln 1-16).
Per claim 2, Parikh teaches that storage area also includes a browser for acquiring and storing acquired token (see col 3, ln 34-57).
Per claim 4, Parikh teaches changing a state of the token from a first state being managed on the blockchain network to a second state being managed through a wallet accessible by a user, i.e., changing ownership rights for digital information for token to be stored in the digital wallet accessible by the user (see col 3, ln 57-67).
Per claim 6, Parikh teaches providing/notifying the user of access right modification (see col 7, ln 49-64), wherein the modification includes restoration information that enables the access right to be restored/relinquished (see col 8, ln 41-46).
Claims 14-15 are similar in scope as that of claim 1.
6. Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parikh.
Parikh teaches providing a user interface for prompting/accepting user inputs to perform various user requests including storing/saving token information (see col 7, ln 24-41). Parikh also teaches prompting/notifying the user information about (access right) modification process (see col 7, ln 49-64), wherein the modification includes restoration information that enables the access right to be restored/relinquished (see col 8, ln 41-46). Parikh does not explicitly teach prompting the user to save the restoration information.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize such prompting in Parikh because it would have enabled the user to confirm and save various requests to modify access right information including the restoration information.
7. Claims 3, 5 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parikh, in view of Sepulveda, U.S. pat. Appl. Pub. No. 2021/0042748.
Per claim 3, Parikh does not explicitly teach that the predetermined information includes information related to a private key. However, Sepulveda teaches that a digital wallet typically includes a private key (see Sepulveda, par 0028).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to recognize such use of private Key in Parikh because it would have enabled accessing the wallet (see Sepulveda, par 0028).
Per claim 5, Sepulveda also teaches that the digital wallet also includes wallet information that can identify the wallet, e.g., address (see par 0028).
Per claim 12, Sepulveda further teaches that the user terminal submits/signs the request with the private and address information via a user interface (see par 0028).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to recognize such use of private key and address information in Parikh because it would have enabled accessing the wallet (see Sepulveda, par 0028).
8. Claims 7-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parikh, in view of Wang, U.S. pat. Appl. Pub. No.11,443,368.
Per claim 7, Parikh does not teach that the acquisition request is generated based on token control information which is set based on a random number. However, Wang teaches using a random number as a control information to generate an encrypted asset/token acquisition request (see Wang, col 10, ln 18-38).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Wang’s teaching in Parikh because it would have enabled generating a secured asset acquisition request.
Per claims 8-9 and 11, Parikh teaches acquiring the asset (i.e., generating acquisition request) by using a web browser to browse/select assets from particular web service/site, e.g., social media sites (see col 9, ln 27-40). Parikh does not explicitly teach accessing a predetermined URL to generate the acquisition request. However, use of predetermined URLs to access particular web service/site for asset acquisition request is very well known in the art.
It would have been obvious on skilled in the art to use/assign a predetermined URL for particular web service/site in Parikh because it would have enabled the user using a web browser to access particular web service/site to request/acquire the asset.
Per claim 10, Parikh teaches providing a user interface to allow user to selectively enter user information for acquiring and storing the acquired token in a wallet accessible by the user (see col 3, ln 34-57 and col 7, ln 13-41).
Response to Amendment
9. Applicant’s arguments filed March 10, 2026 with respect to 101 rejection have been considered but are not deemed persuasive.
Per claim 1, examiner submits that amended claim 1 is still directed to software per se, which is not a patentable eligible subject matter. This is because the added limitation of “a computer of a user terminal” in the claim preamble is merely recited as intended use of the program. A computer component is not explicitly cited in the claim.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to art rejection of claims 1-15 have been considered but are deemed moot in view of new grounds of rejection set forth above.
Conclusion
10. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new grounds of rejection. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See M.P.E.P. § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a).
A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR RESPONSE TO THIS FINAL ACTION IS SET TO EXPIRE THREE MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF THIS ACTION. IN THE EVENT A FIRST RESPONSE 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 EXTENSION FEE PURSUANT TO 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a) WILL BE CALCULATED FROM THE MAILING DATE OF THE ADVISORY ACTION. IN NO EVENT WILL THE STATUTORY PERIOD FOR RESPONSE EXPIRE LATER THAN SIX MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF THIS FINAL ACTION.
11. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Viet Vu whose telephone number is 571-272-3977. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Thursday from 8:00am to 6:00pm. The Group general information number is 571-272-2400. The Group fax number is 571-273-8300.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Emmanuel Moise, can be reached at 571-272-3865.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/Viet D Vu/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2455
3/24/26