DETAILED ACTION
Introduction
This Office action is responsive to the communications filed November 20,2025. Claims 1, 6, 11, 19, and 20 were amended. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
(1) Applicant’s arguments, see page 9, filed November 20, 2025, with respect to the nonstatutory double patenting rejection have been fully considered and are persuasive. The double patenting rejection of claim 1 has been withdrawn.
(2) Applicant has amended claim 20 to overcome the 35 USC 101 rejection, set forth in the Non-Final Rejection.
(3) Applicant's arguments filed with respect the 35 USC 101 rejection of claims 1-19 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Specifically, Applicant asserts that similarly to “as clarified by the August 4, 2025, USPTO eligibility memo…Example 39, where ‘training the neural network’ merely involved mathematical concepts without reciting specific mathematical relationships or formulas, the amended claim’s cryptographic operations merely involve mathematical concepts without setting forth or describing any specific mathematical relationships, calculations, formulas, or equations using words or mathematical symbols. The claim does not require specific like “RSA encryption” or “SHA-256 hashing” by name, and therefore merely involves, rather than recites, any abstract mathematical concepts.” Also, Applicant argues that claims represent a concrete improvement to cryptocurrency wallet technology.
However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. Example 39 is directed to Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning claims while the claims in the instant application do not such language. Also, the claims and specification do not describe the particulars/algorithm to improve the technology.
(4) Applicant has amended the claims, thereby overcoming the 35 USC 103 rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Specifically, the claim 1 recites “execute operations on cryptographic assets in the cryptocurrency wallet in response to successful verification,” which is supported by the specification. Claim 19 recite similar language. However, if Applicant disagrees, please indicate in the response where this feature is described.
Claims 2-18 and 20 are rejected as being dependent upon claim 1.
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.
These claims fall within the four statutory categories of invention.
For example, claim 1 recites an abstract idea of manipulating and providing instructions through mathematical correlations. The claim under its broadest reasonable interpretation recites limitations grouped within the “mathematical concepts” grouping of abstract ideas. Mathematical concepts abstract idea grouping is defined as mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, and mathematical calculations. See MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2), subsection I. The claim limitations reciting the abstract idea are grouped within the “mathematical concepts” grouping of abstract ideas as they relate to manipulating and providing instructions through mathematical correlations. More specifically, the following non-underlined claim elements recite the abstract idea while the bolded claim elements recite additional elements according to MPEP 2106.04(a).
A wallet control apparatus, the wallet control apparatus comprising processing circuitry configured to:
register a new first cryptographic secret at a cryptocurrency wallet hosted in a trusted execution environment on a first remote server wherein the processing circuity for registering the new first cryptographic secret is further configured to:
generate the first cryptographic secret,
obtain a second cryptographic secret from a second remote server that provides a government-backed authentication structure separate from the first remote server, wherein the second cryptographic secret is obtained upon authentication of an owner of the cryptocurrency wallet vis-à-vis the second remote server using a signed identification certificate that is signed by an independent entity operating the second remote server and is renewable through the government entity upon loss,
sign a control instruction for registering the first cryptographic secret at the cryptocurrency wallet using the second cryptographic secret, and
transmit the signed control instruction for registering the first cryptographic secret at the cryptocurrency wallet to the first remote server;
provide instructions for controlling the cryptocurrency wallet to the first remote server, the instructions being cryptographically protected based on the first cryptographic secret; and
execute operations on cryptographic assets in the cryptocurrency wallet in response to successful verification.
Claim 19 recites similar language.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because, when analyzed under prong two of step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test (See MPEP 2106.04(d)), the additional element(s) of the claim(s) such as the wallet control apparatus, processing circuity, cryptocurrency wallet, and remote server is merely used as tools to perform an abstract idea and/or generally link the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment. Specifically, these additional elements perform the steps or functions of manipulating and providing instructions through mathematical correlations. Viewed as a whole, the use of wallet control apparatus, processing circuity, cryptocurrency wallet, and remote server as tools to implement the abstract idea and/or generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it requires no more than a computer or computer networks performing functions that correspond to acts required to carry out the abstract idea. The additional elements do not involve improvements to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field (MPEP 2106.05(a)), and the claims do not apply or use the abstract idea in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception (MPEP 2106.05(e) and Vanda Memo). Therefore, the claims do not, for example, purport to improve the functioning of a computer. Nor do they effect an improvement in any other technology or technical field. Accordingly, the additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and the claims are directed to an abstract idea.
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because, when analyzed under step 2B of the Alice/Mayo test (See MPEP 2106.05), the additional element(s) of the wallet control apparatus, processing circuity, cryptocurrency wallet, and remote server to perform the steps amounts to no more than using generic hardware or software to automate and/or implement the abstract idea of manipulating and providing instructions through mathematical correlations. Viewed as a whole, the combination of elements recited in the claims merely recite the concept of manipulating and providing instructions through mathematical correlations. Therefore, the use of these additional elements does no more than employ the computer as a tool to automate and/or implement the abstract idea. The use of a computer or processor to merely automate and/or implement the abstract idea cannot provide significantly more than the abstract idea itself (MPEP 2106.05 (f) & (h)). Therefore, the claim is not patent eligible.
The dependent claims further describe the abstract idea such as register the new first cryptographic secret after loss of a previously used first cryptographic secret. The dependent claims do not include additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or that provide significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the dependent claims are also not patent eligible.
Conclusion
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 JALATEE WORJLOH whose telephone number is (571)272-6714. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6:00am-2:00pm.
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, John Hayes can be reached at (571) 272-6708. 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.
/Jalatee Worjloh/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3697