DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
1. This office action is in response to application filed 7/23/2025.
2. Claims 1-12 are pending.
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 .
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 1-12
Claims 1-12 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.
Step 1: Claims 1-4 are directed to a system; claims 5-8 are directed to a method; claims 9-12 are directed to a non-transitory computer-readable medium – each of which is one of the statutory categories of inventions.
Step 2A: A claim is eligible at revised Step 2A unless it recites a judicial exception and the exception is not integrated into a practical application of the application.
Prong 1: Prong One of Step 2A evaluates whether the claim recites a judicial exception (an abstract idea enumerated in the 2019 PEG, a law of nature, or a natural phenomenon).
Groupings of Abstract Ideas:
I. MATHEMATICAL CONCEPTS
A. Mathematical Relationships
B. Mathematical Formulas or Equations
C. Mathematical Calculations
II. CERTAIN METHODS OF ORGANIZING HUMAN ACTIVITY
A. Fundamental Economic Practices or Principles (including hedging, insurance, mitigating risk)
B. Commercial or Legal Interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations)
C. Managing Personal Behavior or Relationships or Interactions between People (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions)
III. MENTAL PROCESSES.
Concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion).
See MPEP 2106.04 (a) (2) Abstract Idea Groupings [R-10.2019]
The limitations recited in independent clams 1, 5 and 9 –
generating and issuing a [non-fungible token (NFT)] for a sustainability credit from a regulating authority platform;
receiving the issued NFT sustainability credit from the regulating authority platform via an organization platform over a network;
via a trading platform, [electronically]:
receiving the NFT sustainability credit from the organization platform;
posting the NFT sustainability credit for sale;
conducting a transaction of the NFT sustainability credit between the organization platform and a buyer platform; and
[instantiating the transaction in a block of a blockchain of the NFT] sustainability credit; and
via a [plurality of network nodes]:
validating the block; and
managing the blockchain of the NFT sustainability credit,
wherein the NFT sustainability credit comprises a contractual obligation of the organization to the regulating authority, a date of issuance of the NFT sustainability credit, an authorization by the regulating authority for the organization to consume a material associated with the NFT sustainability credit in compliance with the regulating authority
– that constitutes Fundamental Practices or Principles and/or Commercial/Legal Interactions and hence fall under the abstract idea category Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity.
The limitations of the dependent claims –
(Claim 2, 6, 10) a consumer platform operable to electronically receive the NFT sustainability credit from the organization platform so that a user of the consumer platform can track the NFT sustainability credit of a company that is in possession of the organization platform.
(Claim 3, 7, 11) the user of the consumer platform can retain one or more NFT sustainability credits to track a sustainability footprint of the user.
(Claim 4, 8, 12) when a regulating authority implements rules for the user's sustainability footprint, the user can use the one or more NFT sustainability credits in an activity outside of the user's sustainability footprint.
– also falls under Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity.
Hence under Prong One of Step 2A, claims 1-12 recite a judicial exception.
Prong 2: Prong Two of Step 2A evaluates whether the claim recites additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application of the exception.
Limitations the courts have found indicative that an additional element (or combination of elements) may have integrated the exception into a practical application include:
An improvement in the functioning of a computer, or an improvement to other technology or technical field, as discussed in MPEP §§ 2106.04(d)(1) and 2106.05(a);
Applying or using a judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.04(d)(2);
Implementing a judicial exception with, or using a judicial exception in conjunction with, a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(b);
Effecting a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(c); and
Applying or using the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(e).
The courts have also identified limitations that did not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application:
Merely reciting the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(f);
Adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(g); and
Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(h).
Additional elements recited by the claims, beyond the abstract idea, include: mobile device; fast identity online (FIDO) server; service provider computing device; SDK integrated with website of first party; API. Examiner finds that any additional element(s), beyond the judicial exception, has been recited at a high level of generality such that the claim limitations amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic components (see MPEP 2106.05(f)) or insignificant data gathering activities (see MPEP 2106.05(g)).
The combination of additional elements does not purport to improve the functioning of a computer or effect an improvement in any other technology or technical field. Instead, the additional elements do no more than use the computer as a tool and/or link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. The focus of the claims is not on improvement in computers, but on certain independently abstract ideas – generating and issuing a [non-fungible token (NFT)] for a sustainability credit from a regulating authority platform; receiving the issued NFT sustainability credit from the regulating authority platform via an organization platform over a network; via a trading platform, [electronically]: receiving the NFT sustainability credit from the organization platform; posting the NFT sustainability credit for sale; conducting a transaction of the NFT sustainability credit between the organization platform and a buyer platform; and [instantiating the transaction in a block of a blockchain of the NFT] sustainability credit; and via a [plurality of network nodes]: validating the block; and managing the blockchain of the NFT sustainability credit, wherein the NFT sustainability credit comprises a contractual obligation of the organization to the regulating authority, a date of issuance of the NFT sustainability credit, an authorization by the regulating authority for the organization to consume a material associated with the NFT sustainability credit in compliance with the regulating authority– that merely uses generic computers as tools. Steps that do no more than spell out what it means to “apply it on a computer” cannot confer patent eligibility. Indeed, nothing in claim 1 improves the functioning of the computer, makes it operate more efficiently, or solves any technological problem. See Trading Techs. Int’l, Inc. v. IBG LLC, 921 F.3d 1378, 1384-85 (Fed. Cir. 2019).
Hence, under Prong Two of Step 2A, the additional elements, when considered individually or in combination, do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Hence, the claims are ineligible under Step 2A.
Step 2B:
In Step 2B, the evaluation consists of whether the claim recites additional elements that amount to an inventive concept (aka “significantly more”) than the recited judicial exception.
As discussed in Prong Two, the additional elements in the claims amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic components. When considered individually or as an ordered combination, the additional elements fail to transform the abstract idea of – generating and issuing a [non-fungible token (NFT)] for a sustainability credit from a regulating authority platform; receiving the issued NFT sustainability credit from the regulating authority platform via an organization platform over a network; via a trading platform, [electronically]: receiving the NFT sustainability credit from the organization platform; posting the NFT sustainability credit for sale; conducting a transaction of the NFT sustainability credit between the organization platform and a buyer platform; and [instantiating the transaction in a block of a blockchain of the NFT] sustainability credit; and via a [plurality of network nodes]: validating the block; and managing the blockchain of the NFT sustainability credit, wherein the NFT sustainability credit comprises a contractual obligation of the organization to the regulating authority, a date of issuance of the NFT sustainability credit, an authorization by the regulating authority for the organization to consume a material associated with the NFT sustainability credit in compliance with the regulating authority – into significantly more.
See MPEP 2106.05(f) Mere Instructions To Apply An Exception [R-10.2019].
(2) Whether the claim invokes computers or other machinery merely as a tool to perform an existing process. Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a fundamental economic practice or mathematical equation) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more.
Hence, the claims are ineligible under Step 2B.
Therefore, the claim(s) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to a judicial exception without significantly more.
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.
Claims 1-12
Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Slack (US20230139137) in view of Barton (US20220101430).
Claim 1:
Slack discloses:
a regulating authority platform operable to generate and issue a non-fungible token (NFT) for a sustainability credit;
(See Slack: Para [0058] (“Carbon NFTs represented by the tokens of the present invention are verified by recognized international protocols such as International Organization for Standardization (ISO) (e.g., ISO 14064-66, which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety), Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), European Union Emission Trading System (ETS), and Verified Emission Reductions (VCR) in one embodiment. Additionally, in one embodiment, the carbon offsets represented by the NFTs of the present invention are verified by accredited third-party organizations.”)
an organization platform operable to receive the issued NFT sustainability credit from the regulating authority platform over a network;
(See Slack: Figs. 1, 2, 3, 9)
a trading platform operable to electronically:
receive the NFT sustainability credit from the organization platform;
post the NFT sustainability credit for sale;
conduct a transaction of the NFT sustainability credit between the organization platform and a buyer platform; and
instantiate the transaction in a block of a blockchain of the NFT sustainability credit; and
(See Slack: Figs. 1, 2)
a plurality of network nodes operable to validate the block and manage the blockchain of the NFT sustainability credit,
(See Slack: Para [0065] (“When new data is added to the distributed ledger, it must be validated by a portion of the nodes (e.g., 51%) involved in maintaining the ledger in a process called consensus.”)
wherein the NFT sustainability credit comprises a contractual obligation of the organization to the regulating authority, a date of issuance of the NFT sustainability credit, and an authorization by the regulating authority for the organization to consume a material associated with the NFT sustainability credit in compliance with the regulating authority.
(See Slack: Para
[0042] (“Secondary tracking is implemented by smart contracts in one embodiment of the present invention, where NFTs in the offset pool are programmed with information on the attributes of emission reduction projects that produced the offsets. Minted carbon credit NFTs are available to be dispersed via exchange sales or strategic reserve volumes.”)
[0056] (“In one embodiment, each listing in the carbon NFT list page includes a date associated with the carbon NFT (e.g., date purchased, date generated, an expiration date, etc.), an identification code for each carbon NFT, a certifying entity for each carbon NFT, a project name associated with each carbon NFT, a company name associated with each carbon NFT, a status of the project used to generate each carbon NFT, an amount of carbon NFTs in each set of carbon NFTs, and/or a price for which each carbon NFT or set of carbon NFTs were purchased.”); [0058])
Slack does not specifically disclose:
“regulatory authority”
However Barton teaches the above limitation (See Barton: Para
[0021] (“Carbon trading is the buying and selling of the right to emit a tonne of CO2 or equivalent (CO2e). The right to emit a tonne of CO′ is often referred to as a carbon ‘credit’ or carbon ‘allowance’. For example, in the EU Emissions Trading Scheme there is the EU Allowance (EUA) and in the California system there is the California Carbon Allowance (CCA). The allowances of each trading system can be bought and sold by anyone but, ultimately, they may reach end-users when they need them to cover their regulatory compliance obligations. Voluntary Carbon Credits are traded in a similar manner after being certified by an Independent Professional Non-Governmental Organization which are often referred to as a NGO.”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date to modify the above noted disclosure of Slack as it relates to carbon credit trading platform to include the above noted disclosure of Barton as it relates to carbon credit database. The motivation for combining the references would have been to determine the fair market value for trading oil and gas based carbon credits.
Claims 5, 9 are similar to claim 1 and hence rejected on similar grounds.
Claim 2:
a consumer platform operable to electronically receive the NFT sustainability credit from the organization platform so that a user of the consumer platform can track the NFT sustainability credit of a company that is in possession of the organization platform.
(See Slack: Para [0042])
Claims 6, 10 are similar to claim 2 and hence rejected on similar grounds.
Claim 3:
the user of the consumer platform can retain one or more NFT sustainability credits to track a sustainability footprint of the user.
(See Slack: Para [0042])
Claims 7, 11 are similar to claim 3 and hence rejected on similar grounds.
Claim 4:
when a regulating authority implements rules for the user's sustainability footprint, the user can use the one or more NFT sustainability credits in an activity outside of the user's sustainability footprint.
(See Slack: Para [0046])
Claims 8, 12 are similar to claim 4 and hence rejected on similar grounds.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARUNAVA CHAKRAVARTI whose telephone number is (571)270-1646. The examiner can normally be reached 9 AM - 5 PM ET.
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.
/ARUNAVA CHAKRAVARTI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3692
Prosecution Insights