Detailed Action
Claims 1, 4, and 7-12 are pending and are examined.
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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1, 4, 7, and 12 are currently amended.
Claims 2-3, and 5-6 is cancelled.
Response to Remarks
35 U.S.C. § 112(b)
Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome the previous rejections. Accordingly, the previous rejections are withdrawn.
35 U.S.C. § 101
Remark 1: Applicant argues that the office must clearly identify the alleged abstract idea and then evaluate the claims as a whole in view of the specification, rather than merely noting that the claims involve commerce or computer implementation. Applicant further argues that the amended claims recite specific NFT-linked gift-certificate operations and therefore are either not directed to a judicial exception or, at minimum, integrate any alleged exception into a practical application and recite significantly more. (Applicant Arguments, 2026-03-18).
Response to Remark 1: Applicants general discussion of Alice, Enfish, BASCOM, McRO, Thales, Visual Memory, and the USPTO guidance has been considered, but is not persuasive of error in the rejection. The abstract idea has been sufficiently identified as a commercial promotional/reward distribution scheme involving selecting an artist, issuing or identifying a gift certificate, determining, the certificate qualifies for NFT-linked contract, and providing digital assets based on that determination. The claimed processor, terminal, NFT, serial number, and online account limitations do not improve the functioning of a computer, blockchain, NFT protocol, network, memory structure, sensor configuration, or other technology, but instead implement the business rules of the promotion using generic computer components. The amendments further define who is eligible, what type of serial number is ‘special’, and when NFT-linked content is provided, but these are rules for allocating promotional benefits rather than a technical improvement. Unlike Enfish, McRO, Thales, or Visual Memory, the claims do not recite a specific improvement to computer operation or technological process; and unlike BASCOM, the ordered combination does not place conventional components in a non-conventional technical architecture.
Remark 2: Applicant argues that the claims are not merely directly to commerce organizing human activity, but instead recite a specific technical process for linking physical certificates to NFTs through serial number matching, user verification, and online ownership assignment. Applicant contends that this physical to digital linkage controls NFT scarcity and authenticates fan participation, thereby providing a practical technological implementation rather than merely applying an abstract idea using generic components (id).
Response to Remark 2: Applicants arguments that the claims recite a ‘specific technical solution’ for linking digital assets to physical goods is unpersuasive because the recited sequence remains a set of commercial and administrative rules for distributing promotional value. Generating a gift certificate with a serial number, determining whether that serial number matches a preset special number, verifying prior user voting, and assigning NFT ownership to an online account are data collection, comparison, eligibility, and allocation steps that can be performed by generic computing components. The claimed ‘preset special number’ conditions, including identical numbers, consecutive numbers, or anniversary numbers, are selection criteria for a promotional campaign, not an improvement to the operation of the terminal, processor, application, blockchain, or NFT technology itself. The use of NFTs as the reward medium does not by itself concert the claim into a technological improvement, because the claim does not recite any improvement to NFT creation, storage, authentication, transfer, consensus, cryptography, or network operation. Rather, the NFT and gift certificate limitations merely specify the type of item being awarded and the business logic for determining who receives it.
Remark 3: Applicant argues that even if the independent claims recite an abstract idea, the claims integrate that idea into a practical application by constraining NFT issuance to gift certificates having preset special numbers and by verifying users who voted for the target artist before random distribution. Applicant further argues that these limitations impose meaningful limits on NFT linking and solve problems of indiscriminate NFT generation and unreliable physical to digital association.
Response to Remark 3: Applicants reliance on ‘constraining NFT issuance’, ‘verification logic’, and alleged digital scarcity does not overcome the rejection because these limitations constrain the commercial reward pool, not the operation of any computer or blockchain technology. The claims do not recite a technical mechanism that prevents over issuance at the protocol level, improves NFT minting, improves distributed-ledger consensus, or changes how ownership records are technically stored or enforced. Instead, the claims define eligibility and award rules: users vote for artists, certain serial numbers are treated as special, users are verified, and NFT-linked or general gift certificates are randomly provided. These restrictions may narrow the business implementation, but narrowing the abstract idea, reward type, or promotional condition is not enough to integrate the idea into practical application. Nor does the ordered combination amount to an inventive concept, because the elements operate in their expected manner: receiving inputs, comparing values, verifying users, generating records, and assigning digital assets to accounts.
Remark 4: Applicant argues that the ordered combination of voting-based artist selection, special-number physical gift-certificate generation, voter verification before random provision of NFT-linked versus general gift certificates, and 1:1 NFT-pair matching with online ownership assignment is not well-understood, routine, or conventional. Applicant further argues that, under BASCOM, this unconventional arrangement supplies an inventive concept and provides a technical solution to digital scarcity and asset authentication.
Response to Remark 4: This Step 2B argument is unpersuasive because the claim elements, individually and in combination, amount to conventional computer implementation of the abstract promotional scheme. The claim uses generic processors, memory, an application, user input, identification information, comparison logic, random selection, verification, and online account assignment for their ordinary functions. The alleged ordered combination does not recite a non-conventional technical architecture, specialized blockchain mechanism, improved NFT protocol, improved authentication technique, or improved data structure. Unlike BASCOM, the asserted improvement is not rooted in a particular technical arrangement of computer components, but in the business rules governing who may receive which promotional NFT-linked gift certificate.
35 U.S.C. § 102 and § 103
Remark 1: Applicant argues “The Office Action, on pages 15-21, acknowledges that Yantis fails to teach or suggest the above-noted features of claims 1 and 12, but relies on various portions in Basu to cure the deficiencies. Applicant respectfully disagrees. As now amended, the claims recite "performing [or perform] a survey to determine a [or the] target artist" including "acquiring a user input to vote ...; determining at least one candidate artist . . . as a selected artist; and determining one of the at least one selected artist as the target artist." Yantis generally discusses a platform for tokenizing items, but lacks any mechanism for a multi-candidate voting survey to determine which artist will be featured on the linked goods. The Office Action does not suggest otherwise. Although Basu mentions "ArtistID" and project descriptions, the reference does not teach or suggest a system where a "target artist" is dynamically determined through a specific voting and selection process, much less as claimed. In fact, Basu (and, thereby, Yantis in view of Basu) are completely devoid of any vote count and those features related thereto. See generally Basu [0122]-[0123], [0127]-[0129]. Even the assertions on pages 15-17 of the Office Action fail to address any actual voting and selection mechanisms. Claims 1 and 12 also include a "content gift certificate" with a "serial number that matches a preset special number," where that special number is "manually set to satisfy ... a first condition including a section configured of one identical number, a second condition including a section configured of consecutive numbers, and/or a third condition including a section configured of anniversary numbers related to a predetermined artist." Yantis, at best, only mentions "serial numbers" generically as an example of information that "identifies the item." See, e.g., Yantis[0838]. At no point, however, does Yantis teach or suggest selecting or matching physical goods based on digit patterns, such as identical, consecutive, or artist-specific anniversary numbers, much less in the manner claimed. Again, the Office Action does not suggest otherwise. Further, Basu does not discuss, and thereby, is completely devoid of any serial number digit patterns or anniversary-related number matching, or as claimed, and especially in the context of a content gift certificate. Although the Office Action, on pages 16-17, appears to identify Basu's BackerID as being relevant, this is merely a generic ledger-entry mechanism for a fundraising platform. See e.g., Basu [0134]-[0136]. In contrast, claims 1 and 12 use a voting-based verification that is specifically tied to a random distribution of a physical-digital pair (NFT-linked gift certificate) based on artist-specific anniversary or pattern-matching serial numbers. Basu (and, thereby, Yantis in view of Basu) lacks this "voter-to-random-distribution" logic tied to physical serial number patterns, or as claimed. Moreover, claims 1 and 12 include "providing [or provide] the generated content gift certificate in a random manner," with the providing including "verifying a user who voted for the target artist; and randomly providing at least one gift certificate ... upon being verified as the user who voted for the target artist." Again, given the complete lack of disclosure in Yantis and Basu for the claimed voting and selecting mechanism, its no wonder that the applied art is also devoid of the above-noted verification and provisioning aspects of claims 1 and 12 that are tied to the voting and selection features of these claims. To this end, Yantis and Basu lack any teaching or suggestion of a distribution logic that is specifically contingent upon the user's prior participation in the voting survey for that specific target artist, much less in the context of claims 1 and 12.”. (id).
Response to Remark 1: Examiner respectfully disagrees, as the cited references (e.g. Yantis and Basu) still teach the currently amended independent claims, as shown at least in paragraphs 35, 43, and 104 of Yantis, paragraphs 112, 122-123, and 127-129 of Basu, and as further outlined in paragraphs 27-30 of this action. Indeed, the amendments do not overcome the rejection because Yantis teaches tokenized gift cards/gift certificates, token identifiers/QR codes, mystery-box/random prize distribution, and transfer/redemption of won tokens, while Basu teaches artist/project identification, backer/user participation tied to ArtistID/ProjID, threshold-based selection criteria, NFT creation, and ownership tracking. It would have been obvious to combine Yantis’s random tokenized gift-certificate system with Basu’s artist/backer NFT frameworks to provide NFT-linked gift certificates to verified users who supported a target artist, because doing so predictably uses known NFT reward and fan-engagement mechanisms to distribute artist-related digital content. Accordingly, this contention is unpersuasive.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
Claims 1, 4, and 7-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1
Step 1 of the eligibility analysis asks is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter (See MPEP § 2106.03, subsections I and II). Claims 1, 4, and 7-11 are directed to a computer-implemented method (i.e., process). Claim 12 is directed to a computer-implemented system (i.e., machine, and manufacture). Therefore, these claims fall within the four statutory categories of invention.
Step 2A, Prong One
Prong One asks does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon (MPEP § 2106.04(II)(A)(1)). Claims 1 and 12 under a broadest reasonable interpretation recite an abstract idea because the claims describe allocating digital items or benefits to users according to predefined rules based on user information, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas (MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2), subsection II). The claim limitations reciting the abstract idea are grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas because the limitations describe commercial or legal interactions, including advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors of blockchain-based smart contracts. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
Claim 1:
A method for providing an NFT-linked gift certificate service, in which an application executed by at least one processor of a terminal provides the NFT-linked gift certificate service, the method comprising:
performing a survey to determine a target artist for which a gift certificate is matched, wherein performing the survey to determine the target artist for which the gift certificate is matched comprises:
acquiring a user input to vote for at least one artist among a plurality of candidate artists;
determining at least one candidate artist whose vote count according to the user vote satisfies a predetermined criterion as a selected artist; and determining one of the at least one selected artist as the target artist;
generating a content gift certificate matched with a pair of NFTs containing digital content for the determined target artist, wherein the content gift certificate is an actual gift certificate in which a serial number that specifies the content gift certificate matches a preset special number, the generation of the content gift certificate matched with the pair of NFTs containing the digital content for the determined target artist comprises:
setting a special gift certificate to which the special number is given; and matching the pair of NFTs to the special number of the set special gift certificate, and
the preset special number is a predetermined serial number manually set to satisfy at least one predetermined condition including a first condition including a section configured of one identical number, a second condition including a section configured of consecutive numbers, and/or a third condition including a section configured of anniversary numbers related to a predetermined artist;
providing the generated content gift certificate in a random manner, wherein providing the
generated content gift certificate in a random manner comprises:
verifying a user who voted for the target artist; and
randomly providing at least one gift certificate among the content gift certificates matched with the pair of NFTs and a general gift certificate unmatched with the pair of NFTs upon being verified as the user who voted for the target artist;
acquiring gift certificate identification information specifying a predetermined first gift certificate;
determining whether the first gift certificate is the content gift certificate based on the acquired gift certificate identification information; and
providing the pair of NFTs matched to the content gift certificate online when the first gift certificate is the content gift certificate.
Claim 12:
A system for providing an NFT-linked gift certificate service, the system comprising:
at least one memory in which instructions are stored; and
at least one processor for reading out the instructions stored in the memory and providing the NFT-linked gift certificate service,
wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to:
perform a survey to determine a target artist for which a gift certificate is matched, wherein the performance of the survey to determine the target artist for which the gift certificate is matched comprises:
acquiring a user input to vote for at least one artist among a plurality of candidate artists;
determining at least one candidate artist whose vote count according to the user vote satisfies a predetermined criterion as a selected artist; and determining one of the at least one selected artist as the target artist;
generate a content gift certificate matched with a pair of NFTs containing digital content for the determined target artist, wherein the content gift certificate is an actual gift certificate in which a serial number that specifies the content gift certificate matches a preset special number,
the generation of the content gift certificate matched with the pair of NFTs containing the digital content for the determined target artist comprises:
setting a special gift certificate to which the special number is given;
and matching the pair of NFTs to the special number of the set special gift certificate, and
the preset special number is a predetermined serial number manually set to satisfy at least one predetermined condition including a first condition including a section configured of one identical number, a second condition including a section configured of consecutive numbers, and/or a third condition including a section configured of anniversary numbers related to a predetermined artist;
provide the generated content gift certificate in a random manner, wherein the provision of the generated content gift certificate in a random manner comprises:
verifying a user who voted for the target artist; and randomly providing at least one gift certificate among the content gift certificates matched with the pair of NFTs and a general gift certificate unmatched with the pair of NFTs upon being verified as the user who voted for the target artist;
acquire gift certificate identification information specifying a predetermined first gift certificate;
determine whether the first gift certificate is the content gift certificate based on the acquired gift certificate identification information; and provide providing the pair of NFTs matched to the content gift certificate online when the first gift certificate is the content gift certificate.
Step 2A, Prong Two
Prong Two asks does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application (MPEP § 2106.04(II)(A)(2)). Here, the additional elements of a processor, a platform application, and an NFT, individually and in combination, are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional elements merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea (MPEP § 2106.05(f)) and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment (MPEP § 2106.05(h)). The description of the additional elements evidences that they are generic and conventional elements used as tools to perform the abstract idea. The processor may be a generic and conventional processor (See Spec. 0078). The platform application may be a generic and conventional platform (See Spec. 0062). The NFT may be a generic and conventional NFT (See Spec. 0048).
Step 2B
Step 2B determines whether the claim as a whole amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself (MPEP § 2106.05). Evaluating additional elements to determine whether they amount to an inventive concept requires considering them both individually and in combination to ensure that they amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. Individually, the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. As discussed previously, the description of the additional elements evidences that they are generic and conventional elements used as tools to perform the abstract idea (See Spec 0048, 0062, and 0078). As such, the additional elements merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The ordered combination recites no more than the individual elements do. Thus, the additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea. Accordingly, the claims are directed to the abstract idea identified above without significantly more. The claims are not eligible, warranting a rejection for lack of subject matter eligibility and concluding the eligibility analysis.
Dependent Claims
Claims 4, and 7-12 have also been analyzed. However, the subject matter of these claims also fails to recite patent eligible subject matter for the following reasons:
Claim 4 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes allocating digital items or benefits to users according to predefined rules based on user information, grouped within the “mental processes” grouping of abstract ideas. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein the matching of the pair of NFTs comprises:
randomly selecting one of a plurality of pieces of digital content for the target artist; and
generating the pair of NFTs based on the randomly selected digital content.
Claim 7 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes allocating digital items or benefits to users according to predefined rules based on user information, grouped within the “mental processes” grouping of abstract ideas. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein the provision of the pair of NFTs matched to the content gift certificate online when the first gift certificate is the content gift certificate comprises:
matching the provided pair of NFTs to a user account; and
setting ownership information for the pair of NFTs based on the pair of NFTs matched to the user account.
Claim 8 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes allocating digital items or benefits to users according to predefined rules based on user information, grouped within the “mental processes” grouping of abstract ideas. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
further comprising providing an exchange process for processing a transaction or use of the content gift certificate.
Claim 9 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes allocating digital items or benefits to users according to predefined rules based on user information, grouped within the “mental processes” grouping of abstract ideas. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein the provision of the exchange process comprises changing or discarding the ownership information for the pair of NFTs matched to the traded or used content gift certificate.
Claim 10 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes allocating digital items or benefits to users according to predefined rules based on user information, grouped within the “mental processes” grouping of abstract ideas. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
further comprises providing a new NFT based on a plurality of content gift certificates,
wherein the provision of the new NFT comprises at least one of:
determining whether a preset new NFT reward condition is satisfied;
maintaining a plurality of a pair of NFTs according to the plurality of content gift certificates and providing an additional NFT that is provided when the new NFT reward condition is satisfied; or
deleting the plurality of the pair of NFTs and providing a higher-level NFT that is provided.
Claim 11 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes allocating digital items or benefits to users according to predefined rules based on user information, grouped within the “mental processes” grouping of abstract ideas. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein the additional NFT comprises digital content for a target artist that matches at least some of the plurality of content gift certificates, and the higher-level NFT comprises digital content in which at least one component of a pair of NFTs that matches at least some of the plurality of content gift certificates is upgraded.
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, 4 and 7-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yantis et al. (US20220058636A1) (hereinafter “Yantis”) in view of Basu et al. (US20220173893A1) (hereinafter “Basu”).
As per Claim 1 and 12, Yantis teaches:
A method for providing an NFT-linked gift certificate service, in which an application executed by at least one processor of a terminal provides the NFT-linked gift certificate service, the method comprising: (“User devices 190 can refer to any computing device with which a user (e.g., consumer, merchant, manufacturer, provider and the like) can access the platform. Examples of user devices include, but are not limited to, smartphones, tablet computer devices, laptop computing devices, personal computing devices, smart televisions, gaming consoles, and the like.” (Para. 0841); “a system for generating a digital token that uniquely represents a unique unit of a gift card, includes an interface configured to handle a unique identifier for a unique unit of a gift card, a cryptographic token generation system that generates a unique digital token.” (Para. 0104); “the first digital token is a non-fungible token.” (Para. 0127))
performing a survey to determine a target artist for which a gift certificate is matched; (“, the mystery box system 806 may allow players to select a mystery box to play from a plurality of available mystery boxes, where each mystery box may have a respective theme.” (Para. 0949); “a fifth box may be music-themed, where the box may contain tokens relating to items that correspond to a particular band or artist (e.g., a signed show poster, memorabilia from the band or artist, tickets to a show, download codes for an album or song, and the like); and so forth. In this way, players may select to play for prizes that are enticing to them.” (Para. 0949)
generating a content gift certificate matched with a pair of NFTs containing digital content for the determined target artist; (“the platform 100 provides a marketplace for the 3rd party sellers to transact for items using tokens, whereby a token is a digital marker that defines an ownership right in a particular item.” (Para. 0837); “unique digital token generated by the cryptographic token generation system and the unique identifier for the unique unit of the gift card, such that the cryptographically secure digital token provides a unique digital representation of the unique unit of the gift card.” (Para. 0104); “a fifth box may be music-themed, where the box may contain tokens relating to items that correspond to a particular band or artist (e.g., a signed show poster, memorabilia from the band or artist, tickets to a show, download codes for an album or song, and the like); and so forth.” (Para. 0949))
wherein the content gift certificate is an actual gift certificate in which a serial number that specifies the content gift certificate matches a preset special number, the generation of the content gift certificate matched with the pair of NFTs containing the digital content for the determined target artist comprises: setting a special gift certificate to which the special number is given; and matching the pair of NFTs to the special number of the set special gift certificate, and (“the real-world object is a consumer product, a unique instance of a digital item, or a gift card.” (Para. 0035); “the item is a gift card and the unique digital token represents a right to redeem the gift card.” (Para. 0043); “According to some embodiments of the present disclosure, a system for generating a digital token that uniquely represents a unique unit of a gift card, includes an interface configured to handle a unique identifier for a unique unit of a gift card, a cryptographic token generation system that generates a unique digital token that has a set of token attributes that correspond to the set of gift card attributes, wherein the unique digital token is cryptographically secure, and a linking system configured to generate a cryptographically secure, one-to-at-least-one link between the unique digital token generated by the cryptographic token generation system and the unique identifier for the unique unit of the gift card, such that the cryptographically secure digital token provides a unique digital representation of the unique unit of the gift card.” (Para. 0104))
the preset special number is a predetermined serial number manually set to satisfy at least one predetermined condition including a first condition including a section configured of one identical number, a second condition including a section configured of consecutive numbers, and/or a third condition including a section configured of anniversary numbers related to a predetermined artist; (“a method for generating a digital token that uniquely represents an item includes obtaining, by a processing system of a tokenization platform, a unique identifier for a unique unit of the item, generating, by a cryptographic token generation system, a unique digital token includes a set of digital attributes that correspond to the set of item attributes, and cryptographically linking, by a linking system, the unique digital token and the unique identifier for the unique unit of the item such that the unique digital token provides a unique digital representation of the unique unit of the item.” (Para. 0033); “possession of the unique digital token represents ownership of the item.” (Para. 0042); “the item is a gift card and the unique digital token represents a right to redeem the gift card.” (Para. 0043))
providing the generated content gift certificate in a random manner, wherein providing the; (“a “mystery box” may refer to a set of tokens that potentially can be won by a player, where each token represents a different item that can be redeemed using a token.” (Para. 0946); “In response to the receiving payment from the player, the mystery box system 806 may generate a random number that is bound by the overall range of values for the box (e.g. 1-100).” (Para. 0947); “The mystery box system 806 may then determine which token, if any, was won by the player based on the random number.” (Para. 0947))
generated content gift certificate in a random manner comprises: verifying a user who voted for the target artist; and randomly providing at least one gift certificate among the content gift certificates matched with the pair of NFTs and a general gift certificate unmatched with the pair of NFTs upon being verified as the user who voted for the target artist; (“In response to the receiving payment from the player, the mystery box system 806 may generate a random number that is bound by the overall range of values for the box (e.g. 1-100). The mystery box system 806 may then determine which token, if any, was won by the player based on the random number.” (Para. 0947); “For example, a mystery box may be jewelry-themed, whereby the mystery box includes a first token representing a diamond ring, a second token representing a cubic zirconium ring, and eight tokens, each representing a $25 gift card that can be spent at a specific jewelry shop (e.g., the jewelry shop that provided the rings).” (Para. 0947); “the mystery box system 806 may allow players to select a mystery box to play from a plurality of available mystery boxes, where each mystery box may have a respective theme. For example, a first mystery box may be art themed such that the mystery box contains tokens corresponding to art-related items (e.g., arts of work, art related products, services relating to art (e.g., a commissioned painting by an artist), and the like); a second box may be entertainment themed, where the second box may contain tokens corresponding to a movie and television-related items (e.g., memorabilia items from popular movies and/or TV shows, DVDs or download codes for movies and/or TV shows, gift certificates to movie theaters, and the like); a third box may be sports themed, where the third box may contain tokens corresponding to sports-related items that correspond to a particular team (e.g., game worn apparel, tickets to games, replica apparel, team apparel, and the like); a fourth box may be gaming themed, where the fourth box may contain tokens corresponding to gaming-related items (e.g., video game systems, video games, gift certificates, upgrades for characters of a particular game, and the like); a fifth box may be music-themed, where the box may contain tokens relating to items that correspond to a particular band or artist (e.g., a signed show poster, memorabilia from the band or artist, tickets to a show, download codes for an album or song, and the like); and so forth.” (Para. 0949))
acquiring gift certificate identification information specifying a predetermined first gift certificate; (“For example, a mystery box may be jewelry-themed, whereby the mystery box includes a first token representing a diamond ring, a second token representing a cubic zirconium ring, and eight tokens, each representing a $25 gift card that can be spent at a specific jewelry shop (e.g., the jewelry shop that provided the rings).” (Para. 0947); “the mystery box system 806 may print out a ticket that has a token identifier of the won ticket (e.g., a QR code).” (Para. 0953); “The instance of the smart contract may define the items or tiers of items of the new mystery box, the odds for each item (or tier of items), the token identifiers of each of items in the mystery box (or replacement items that can be included in the mystery box), and a price to play the mystery box.” (Para. 0951))
determining whether the first gift certificate is the content gift certificate based on the acquired gift certificate identification information; and (“the player may redeem a ticket indicating a won token at the brick-and-mortar location. In these embodiments, the brick-and-mortar location may include scanning devices that scan the tickets and communicates the token identifier of the won token to the casino gaming system.” (Para. 0954); “In response to receiving the token identifier of the won token, the mystery box system 806 may redeem the won token on behalf of the player and may communicate a verification of the redemption of the won token to the scanning device.” (Para. 0954); “each mystery box is governed by a smart contract. The smart contract may define the different items or tiers of items, and for each respective item or tier of items, odds for winning the respective item.” (Para. 0951))
providing the pair of NFTs matched to the content gift certificate online when the first gift certificate is the content gift certificate. (“the mystery box system 806, in response to a player winning a prize from the mystery box, may transfer the token to an account of the winning player.” (Para. 0948); “the won token may appear in the digital wallet of the player. Alternatively, the mystery box system 806 may deliver the won token to the user via an electronic message (e.g., a text message, a messaging app message, an email, or the like).” (Para. 0948); “In response to the player scanning the ticket, the mystery box system 806 may facilitate the transfer of the token to an account of the player, whereby the ticket may appear in the player's digital wallet. Once this occurs, the player may redeem, sell, gift, collateralize, or otherwise transact with the token.” (Para. 0954))
Yantis does not disclose:
“wherein performing the survey to determine the target artist for which the gift certificate is matched comprises: acquiring a user input to vote for at least one artist among a plurality of candidate artists; determining at least one candidate artist whose vote count according to the user vote satisfies a predetermined criterion as a selected artist; and determining one of the at least one selected artist as the target artist;” (claim 1).
However, as per Claim 1, Basu in the analogous art of NFT processing, teaches: “wherein performing the survey to determine the target artist for which the gift certificate is matched comprises: acquiring a user input to vote for at least one artist among a plurality of candidate artists; determining at least one candidate artist whose vote count according to the user vote satisfies a predetermined criterion as a selected artist; and determining one of the at least one selected artist as the target artist;”. (See “Disclosed is a fundraising mechanism that helps artists to gain financial support for their initiatives, and where the backers can receive a share of the profits in exchange for their support. Using the disclosed approach, the blockchain system, can provide support for ongoing storage of the NFTs. Finally, an approach is disclosed to allow NFT to be transferred back and forth between a first blockchain and a second blockchain.” (Para. 0112); “1) The artist posts an NFT seeking a funding transaction to the NFT_SC 320, specifying description, field, and comment: a) Artist identification, ArtistID, which identifies the artist with a unique identification for the contract.” (Para. 0122-123); “e) Project end date, EndDate, which is the end date when the fundraiser stops. f) Minimum funding, MinFund, which specifies the minimum funding necessary to proceed with the project. If the MinFund is not met by the end date, the fundraiser fails. g) Maximum funding, MaxFund, is optional. If specified and the amount is met or exceeded, the fundraiser ends immediately.” (Para. 0127-0129)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the method of Yantis, which allows users to select among music-themed mystery boxes containing items tied to particular bands or artists, with the fundraising mechanism of Basu, which records backer contributions tied to an ArtistID and applies minimum and maximum funding thresholds to decide which artist projects proceed, to include treating user selections or contributions as votes for candidate artists, determining which artists satisfy a predetermined criterion, and designating one or those artists as a target artist for NFT-linked certificates. Therefore, the incentives of letting fans collectively influence which artists receive promotional focus and rewards provided a reason to make an adaptation, and the invention resulted from application of the prior knowledge in a predictable manner.
As per Claim 4, Yantis teaches:
The method of claim 1, wherein the matching of the pair of NFTs comprises: randomly selecting one of a plurality of pieces of digital content for the target artist; and generating the pair of NFTs based on the randomly selected digital content. (“In response to the receiving payment from the player, the mystery box system 806 may generate a random number that is bound by the overall range of values for the box (e.g. 1-100). The mystery box system 806 may then determine which token, if any, was won by the player based on the random number.” (Para. 0947); “For example, a mystery box may be jewelry-themed, whereby the mystery box includes a first token representing a diamond ring, a second token representing a cubic zirconium ring, and eight tokens, each representing a $25 gift card that can be spent at a specific jewelry shop (e.g., the jewelry shop that provided the rings).” (Para. 0947); “the mystery box system 806 may allow players to select a mystery box to play from a plurality of available mystery boxes, where each mystery box may have a respective theme. For example, a first mystery box may be art themed such that the mystery box contains tokens corresponding to art-related items (e.g., arts of work, art related products, services relating to art (e.g., a commissioned painting by an artist), and the like); a second box may be entertainment themed, where the second box may contain tokens corresponding to a movie and television-related items (e.g., memorabilia items from popular movies and/or TV shows, DVDs or download codes for movies and/or TV shows, gift certificates to movie theaters, and the like); a third box may be sports themed, where the third box may contain tokens corresponding to sports-related items that correspond to a particular team (e.g., game worn apparel, tickets to games, replica apparel, team apparel, and the like); a fourth box may be gaming themed, where the fourth box may contain tokens corresponding to gaming-related items (e.g., video game systems, video games, gift certificates, upgrades for characters of a particular game, and the like); a fifth box may be music-themed, where the box may contain tokens relating to items that correspond to a particular band or artist (e.g., a signed show poster, memorabilia from the band or artist, tickets to a show, download codes for an album or song, and the like); and so forth.” (Para. 0949))
As per Claim 7, Yantis teaches:
The method of claim 1, wherein the provision of the pair of NFTs matched to the content gift certificate online when the first gift certificate is the content gift certificate comprises: matching the provided pair of NFTs to a user account; and setting ownership information for the pair of NFTs based on the pair of NFTs matched to the user account. (“the mystery box system 806, in response to a player winning a prize from the mystery box, may transfer the token to an account of the winning player. In these embodiments, the won token may appear in the digital wallet of the player.” (Para. 0948); “the player may redeem a ticket indicating a won token at the brick-and-mortar location. In these embodiments, the brick-and-mortar location may include scanning devices that scan the tickets and communicates the token identifier of the won token to the casino gaming system. In response to receiving the token identifier of the won token, the mystery box system 806 may redeem the won token on behalf of the player and may communicate a verification of the redemption of the won token to the scanning device.” (Para. 0954); “In embodiments, possession of the unique digital token represents ownership of the item.” (Para. 0042)).
As per Claim 8, Yantis teaches:
The method of claim 7, further comprising providing an exchange process for processing a transaction or use of the content gift certificate. (“Once this occurs, the player may redeem, sell, gift, collateralize, or otherwise transact with the token.” (Para. 0954); “the price to play may be set by the jewelry shop, such that the gift cards may be considered a mechanism to drive traffic to the jewelry shop.” (Para. 0947))
As per Claim 9, Yantis teaches:
The method of claim 8, wherein . . .
Yantis does not disclose:
• “the provision of the exchange process comprises changing or discarding the ownership information for the pair of NFTs matched to the traded or used content gift certificate” (claim 1).
However, as per Claim 9, Basu in the analogous art of NFT processing, teaches: “the provision of the exchange process comprises changing or discarding the ownership information for the pair of NFTs matched to the traded or used content gift certificate”. (See “The supported requests include creating, viewing, purchasing, transferring ownership, setting permissions for reveal of data at a future date, adding, updating, deleting, moving, copying, and renaming data assets.” (Abstract); “When the fundraiser ends, the NFT_SC 320 verifies that the funding goal has been met. If so, the contributions are recorded, and the funds are transferred to the artist. Otherwise, all funds are returned to the backers.” (Para. 0137); “After successful fundraising, the artist can use the funding resources to create their project. Once the NFT completed, the artist may call the NFT_SC 320 to release the NFT to the blockchain platform. Initially, the NFT is owned and controlled by the artist, though the backers' shares of the NFT are also recorded.” (Para. 0138))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the method of Yantis, where a won token is redeemed at a physical location and system verifies redemption of that token, with the technique of Basu, where NFT ownership and subsequent sales, to include changing or discarding ownership information for a pair of NFTs when the corresponding content gift certificate is traded or used. Therefore, the incentives of keeping blockchain ownership records consistent with real-world transfer or redemption of the underlying certificate provided a reason to make an adaptation, and the invention resulted from application of the prior knowledge in a predictable manner.
As per Claim 10, Yantis teaches:
The method of claim 1, further comprises . . .
Yantis does not disclose:
• “providing a new NFT based on a plurality of content gift certificates, wherein the provision of the new NFT comprises at least one of: determining whether a preset new NFT reward condition is satisfied; maintaining a plurality of a pair of NFTs according to the plurality of content gift certificates and providing an additional NFT that is provided when the new NFT reward condition is satisfied; or deleting the plurality of the pair of NFTs and providing a higher-level NFT that is provided” (claim 1).
However, as per Claim 10, Basu in the analogous art of NFT processing, teaches: “providing a new NFT based on a plurality of content gift certificates, wherein the provision of the new NFT comprises at least one of: determining whether a preset new NFT reward condition is satisfied; maintaining a plurality of a pair of NFTs according to the plurality of content gift certificates and providing an additional NFT that is provided when the new NFT reward condition is satisfied; or deleting the plurality of the pair of NFTs and providing a higher-level NFT that is provided”. (See “The supported requests include creating, viewing, purchasing, transferring ownership, setting permissions for reveal of data at a future date, adding, updating, deleting, moving, copying, and renaming data assets.” (Abstract); “FIG. 7 depicts a flow of creating a blockchain NFT backed by dStorage 700. The dStorage support refers to a decentralized data storage layer supported in the disclosed blockchain platform that can efficiently support the large space requirements needed for rich NFT content. The Royalty_Contract 780 is a smart contract which connects with the NFT_SC and executes when a trade happens. The Royalty_Contract 780 disburses a fee portion of the transaction between the creator 755, dStorage, and marketplace entities. The marketplace is a place for people to buy/sell NFTs.” (Para. 0176); “28. The method of claim 10, wherein the permission settings allow the owner to reveal the NFT at a future date. 29. The method of claim 28, wherein the NFT does not have any identified data asset initially and is used as a fundraising platform with the NFT sold to backers and the data asset is added or revealed at the future date. 30. The method of claim 29, further comprising: selecting at least two NFTs at random.” (Claims 28-30))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the method of Basu, which defines items or tiers of items with differing value and odds within a mystery box and thereby suggests higher-level rewards relative to more common prizes, with the technique of Basu, which supports selecting NFTS, revealing or adding data at a future date, and performing operations of NFTs based on contract conditions, to include determining when a new NFT reward condition based on a plurality of NFT-linked content gift certificates is satisfied and then either providing an additional NFT or replacing the prior NFTs with a higher level NFT. Therefore, the incentives of a loyalty and collectibles system to encourage repeated participation and collection by offering bonus or upgrade rewards when certain thresholds are met provided a reason to make an adaptation, and the invention resulted from application of the prior knowledge in a predictable manner.
As per Claim 11, Yantis teaches:
The method of claim 10, wherein . . .
Yantis does not disclose:
• “the additional NFT comprises digital content for a target artist that matches at least some of the plurality of content gift certificates, and the higher-level NFT comprises digital content in which at least one component of a pair of NFTs that matches at least some of the plurality of content gift certificates is upgraded.” (claim 1).
However, as per Claim 1, Basu in the analogous art of NFT processing, teaches: “the additional NFT comprises digital content for a target artist that matches at least some of the plurality of content gift certificates, and the higher-level NFT comprises digital content in which at least one component of a pair of NFTs that matches at least some of the plurality of content gift certificates is upgraded.”. (See “Disclosed is a fundraising mechanism that helps artists to gain financial support for their initiatives, and where the backers can receive a share of the profits in exchange for their support.” (Para. 0112); “As the world moves to an online, digital retail model, there has been a struggle to find ways to reward artists and other content creators for their work. NFTs allow artists to create their work and then sell it online, with ownership tracked on the blockchain to determine who owns the unique copy of the work of art.” (Para. 0113-0114); “a decentralized data storage layer supported in the disclosed blockchain platform that can efficiently support the large space requirements needed for rich NFT content.” (Para. 0176))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the method of Yantis, where music-themed boxes provide different levels of artist-related items for the same band or artist, with the technique of Basu, in which NFTs are tied to specific artists and contain media content controlled through contracts, to include defining an additional NFT whose digital content corresponds to at least one of the same artist-linked content gift certificates and higher-level NFT whose digital content is an upgraded version of at least one component of the prior pair. Therefore, the incentives of fan engagement and digital collectibles platforms to offer progressively more valuable or exclusive items for a given artist as users accumulate earlier items provided a reason to make an adaptation, and the invention resulted from application of the prior knowledge in a predictable manner.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: US20220122062A1 (Mayblum), discussing “a recipient may use a digital currency card, a mobile application, and/or a web application configured for payment in a digital currency to receive funds allocated to them.” (Para. 0328)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Justin A. Jimenez whose telephone number is (571) 270-3080. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30 AM - 5:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, John W. Hayes can be reached on 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.
/Justin Jimenez/
Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3697
/JOHN W HAYES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3697
Prosecution Insights