DETAILED ACTION
Status of Application
This action is a Final Rejection. This action is in response to the amendment and response filed on June 25, 2026.
Claims 1, 3, 5, 10, 12, 14, and 19 have been amended.
Claims 1-20 are pending and rejected.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Response to Arguments
Regarding the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 101, Applicant argues that “[v]erifying that a physical product is authentic is not a ‘commercial or legal interaction.’ No commerce is conducted by the recited verification operation: no goods change hands, no payment is made, no offer is accepted, and no agreement is formed.” Remarks at 15-16. However, these actions are not required in order for a claim to recite commercial or legal interactions. Verifying that a physical product is authentic is a business process and per the background of the Specification, this feature is important for secondary market sales and for providing value to both end users and brands.
Applicant further argues that “Applicant’s specification describes a concrete technological improvement: a more secure and reliable way to verify the origin and provenance of a physical asset by coupling a machine-readable code (e.g., a near-field communication (NFC) chip) physically attached to the asset with a blockchain query that identifies a corresponding NFT and retrieves its metadata.” Remarks at 17. Applicant further asserts that “[t]his coupling establishes a cryptographically anchored chain of provenance between a tangible object and an immutable on-chain record, which conventional verification methods (e.g., visual inspection, holograms, paper certificates, or centralized databases) cannot replicate because such conventional methods are susceptible to counterfeiting, tampering, and single-point-of-failure manipulation. The improvement is to the verification technology itself: the claimed architecture binds a tamper-evident physical token to a tamper-evident digital token, such that the authenticity of a physical product can be confirmed by querying the blockchain rather than by relying on a forgeable physical credential or an alterable central record.” Id. However, Applicant is describing an alleged improvement to the business process, i.e., abstract idea, and not to the technology itself.
Applicant further refers to Desjardins and Carmody to support the argument of eligibility. Remarks at 18. However, the claims were examined according to the MPEP. Additionally Carmody is neither precedential nor informative and both decisions have a different set of facts than the instant application.
Applicant further argues that “[w]hen the independent claims are considered as a whole and as an ordered combination, they recite a specific, non-conventional arrangement of components that integrates any alleged abstract idea into a practical application…” Remarks at 18. However, the rejection does not allege that the additional elements are well-understood, routine, or conventional.
Applicant further argues that “the present independent claims recite a technology-based solution to a specific technical problem: the inability of conventional methods to reliably and tamper-evidently verify that a particular physical object corresponds to an authentic, on-change record of provenance.” Remarks at 19. However, Applicant is describing a business problem that uses a programmed general purpose computing device as a tool to solve with a business solution.
Applicant further argues that the rejection dismisses technical limitations. Remarks at 19-20. However, these additional elements have not been invented or improved by Applicant. Instead, they are existing technology that the Applicant is using to implement the abstract idea.
Applicant further argues that “the claims recite ‘significantly more’ for the same reason BASCOM found eligibility: while individual components may be conventional, the way they are arranged and interact is not. The specific ordered combination of storing a blockchain of NFTs each bound to a physical asset, querying that blockchain with a product identifier extracted from a machine-readable code physically attached to the asset, validating the association, and generating a verification result amounts to significantly more than the alleged abstract idea.” Remarks at 20. However, when claim 1, for example, is viewed as a whole, it is receiving a request to verify a product, querying a blockchain to identify an NFT, determining that the product is verified, and providing a verification result to a computing device. Determining whether stored data verifies an asset does not provide significantly more.
As such, the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101 is maintained.
Regarding the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103, Applicant argues that “neither Collen nor Andelin, alone or in combination, teaches or suggests ‘executing, by a querying module of a processing server, a query on the blockchain to identify an NFT of the plurality of NFTs stored on the blockchain that includes a product identifier matching the machine-readable code,’ as recited in the present independent claim 1.” Remarks at 24. In light of Applicant’s amendment, there is a new ground of rejection. Therefore, Applicant’s argument is moot.
Applicant further argues that “[t]he content of the verification result is not a mere label; it is functionally integral to the claimed method.” Remarks at 24. However, there is no claimed function for the content of the verification result. However, for Collen to perform verification, it would necessarily include an indication of the product identifier and product details. However, the content of what is then transmitted to the first user computing device is non-functional descriptive material.
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 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1: Does the Claim Fall within a Statutory Category? (see MPEP 2106.03)
Yes, with respect to claims 1-9, which recite a method and, therefore, are directed to the statutory class of process.
Yes, with respect to claims 10-18, which recite a system and, therefore, are directed to the statutory class of machine or manufacture.
Yes, with respect to claims 19 and 20, which recite a computer program product comprising a non-transitory computer readable storage medium and, therefore, are directed to the statutory class of manufacture.
Step 2A, Prong One: Is a Judicial Exception Recited? (see MPEP 2106.04(a))
The following claims (Claims 1-9 are representative) identify the limitations that recite the abstract idea in regular text and that recite additional elements in bold:
1. A method for cross-network transactions, comprising:
storing, in a memory of a processing server, a blockchain comprised of a plurality of blocks, each block of the plurality of blocks including at least a block header and one or more data values, wherein each data value of the one or more data values is a non-fungible token (NFT) associated with a physical asset, and wherein each NFT includes metadata including at least a product identifier and product details;
storing, in the memory of the processing server, a database, the database including one or more user account profiles, each of the one or more user account profiles including a user identifier and a blockchain wallet address;
receiving, by a receiving device of the processing server from a first user computing device, a product verification request message including a machine-readable code;
executing, by a querying module of a processing server, a query on the blockchain to identify an NFT of the plurality of NFTs stored on the blockchain that includes a product identifier matching the machine-readable code;
in response to identifying an NFT including a product identifier matching the machine-readable code, determining, by a validation module of the processing server, the product associated with the machine-readable code is verified;
generating, by a generation module of the processing server, a verification result indicating that the product associated with the machine-readable code is verified, the verification result including the product identifier and product details; and
transmitting, by a transmitting device of the processing server, the verification result to the first user computing device.
2. The method of claim 1, further comprising:
receiving, by the receiving device of the processing server from a merchant computing device, a transfer request message including transaction data, the transaction data including a user identifier and the product identifier matching the machine-readable code;
identifying, by the querying module of the processing server, a user account profile of the one or more user account profiles including the user identifier of the transaction message;
generating, by a generation module of the processing server, a first blockchain transaction including the blockchain wallet address of the identified user account profile as a recipient address and the transaction data; and
transmitting, by the transmitting device of the processing server, the first blockchain transaction to the blockchain.
3. The method of claim 2, further comprising:
hosting, by the processing server, a digital marketplace for exchange of products and NFTs associated with the products;
receiving, by the receiving device of the processing server from the first user computing device, a product listing request including at least the machine-readable code and a user identifier identifying the first user;
executing, by the querying module of the processing server, a query on the blockchain to identify a second NFT of the plurality of NFTs stored on the blockchain that includes a product identifier matching the machine-readable code of the product listing request;
receiving, by the receiving device of the processing server, a product result including metadata of the second NFT including the product identifier matching the machine-readable code;
generating, by the generation module of the processing server, a product listing for a product associated with the identified second NFT, the product listing including the metadata of the identified second NFT and the first user identifier included in the product listing request; and
listing, by the processing server, the product listing on the digital marketplace.
4. The method of claim 3, further comprising:
receiving, by the receiving device of the processing server from a second user computing device, a product purchase request, the product purchase request including at least the product identifier included in the product listing, the user identifier included in the product listing, a user identifier of the second user, and a transaction amount;
identifying, by the querying module of the processing server, a user account profile of the one or more user account profiles including the user identifier of the second user included in the product purchase request;
identifying, by the querying module of the processing server, a user account profile of the one or more user account profiles including the user identifier included in the product listing;
generating, by the generation module of the processing server, a second blockchain transaction including the blockchain wallet address of the identified user account profile of the second user as a sending address, a blockchain wallet address of an escrow account as a recipient address, the identified user account including the user identifier included in the product listing, and the transaction amount; and
transmitting, by the transmitting device of the processing server, the second blockchain transaction to the blockchain.
5. The method of claim 4, further comprising:
receiving, by the receiving device of the processing server from the second user computing device, a second product verification request message including a second machine-readable code;
executing, by the querying module of a processing server, a query on the blockchain to identify an NFT of the plurality of NFTs stored on the blockchain that includes a product identifier matching the second machine-readable code;
receiving, by the receiving device of the processing server, a verification result including metadata of the NFT including the product identifier matching the second machine-readable code;
transmitting, by a transmitting device of the processing server, the verification result to the second user computing device;
generating, by the generation module of the processing server, a third blockchain transaction including the blockchain wallet address of the of the escrow account as the sending address, a blockchain wallet address of the identified user account including the user identifier included in the product listing as the recipient address, and the transaction amount; and
transmitting, by the transmitting device of the processing server, the third blockchain transaction to the blockchain.
6. The method of claim 1, wherein the machine-readable code is a near-field communication chip attached to a product.
7. The method of claim 1, wherein the one or more user account profiles includes a tokenized payment card.
8. The method of claim 1, wherein the determining the product associated with the machine-readable code is verified and the generating the verification result is executed by a smart contract on the blockchain.
9. The method of claim 4, wherein the blockchain wallet address included in each of the one or more user account profiles is a tokenized payment card;
wherein the identified user account profile of the second user includes a first preferred transaction currency and the identified user account profile of the user identifier included in the product listing includes a second preferred transaction currency; and
wherein the generating the second blockchain transaction includes: converting, by the processing server, the transaction amount from the first preferred transaction currency to the second preferred transaction currency.
Yes. But for the recited additional elements as shown above in bold, the remaining limitations of the claims recite certain methods of organizing human activity. The claims are directed to a marketplace for transactions of goods associated with digital assets. This type of method of organizing human activity is a commercial interaction such as agreements in the form of contracts, legal obligations, sales activities or behaviors, and business relations. Thus, the claims recite an abstract idea.
Step 2A, Prong Two: Is the Abstract Idea Integrated into a Practical Application? (see MPEP 2106.04(d))
No. The claims as a whole merely use a computer as a tool to perform the abstract idea. The computing components (i.e., additional elements that are in bold above) are recited at a high level of generality and are merely invoked as a tool to implement the steps. For example, only a programmed general purpose computing device (i.e., processing server) is needed to implement the claimed process. Simply implementing the abstract idea on a generic computer is not a practical application of the abstract idea. Furthermore, the abstract idea is merely being linked to a particular technological environment, i.e., a blockchain environment. Employing well known technology within a blockchain environment to execute the abstract idea, even when limiting the use of the abstract idea to this environment, does not integrate the exception into a practical application or add significantly more. Additionally, there is no improvement to the functioning of a computer or technology. Therefore, the abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application.
Step 2B: Does the Claim Provide an Inventive Concept? (see MPEP 2106.05)
No. As discussed with respect to Step 2A, Prong 2, the additional elements in the claims, both individually and in combination, amount to no more than tools to perform the abstract idea. Merely performing the abstract idea using a computer cannot provide an inventive concept. Therefore, the claims do not provide an inventive concept.
As such, the claims are not patent eligible.
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, 6, 8, 10, 12-15, 17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Collen et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0193656 A1 and Loreth et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2024/0412208 A1.
Claim 1:
Collen teaches:
storing, in a memory of a processing server, a blockchain comprised of a plurality of blocks, each block of the plurality of blocks including at least a block header and one or more data values, wherein each data value of the one or more data values is a non-fungible token (NFT) associated with a physical asset, and wherein each NFT includes metadata including at least a product identifier and product details (see at least Collen, Figure 1, item 108 (Blockchain); paragraph 0042 (“Physical object 102 may be linked to a digital asset, such as a cryptographic token, like an NFT, whose record of ownership is stored on a blockchain 108.”); paragraph 0063 (“Additionally, the user will be prompted to scan a NFC chip (or otherwise identify) in the physical object that corresponds to the NFT digital asset. The NFC scan may trigger a verification by making an API call to the marketplace databases to check the metadata of the NFT and its entangled physical counterpart. The marketplace may verify the scanned NFC chip is linked with the relevant NFT.”); paragraph 0066 (“Creating a listing may involve adding metadata about the condition of the physical object, the expected sale price, the length of time the listing would be available, and recent photos of the physical object.”)).
storing, in the memory of the processing server, a database, the database including one or more user account profiles, each of the one or more user account profiles including a user identifier and a blockchain wallet address (see at least Collen, Figure 13; paragraph 0047 (“address of the wallet”); paragraph 0136).
receiving, by a receiving device of the processing server from a first user computing device, a product verification request message including a machine-readable code (see at least Collen, paragraph 0043 (“The marketplace may verify ownership of the NFT by comparing the address of the wallet with the listed owner in blockchain 108. The seller may verify ownership of the physical object 102 by scanning it with seller computing device 104. Physical object 102 may include a NFC chip configured to communicate with seller computing device 104.”); paragraph 0049 (“At 208, seller 201 may scan the NFT chip in the physical object to prove ownership of the object.”)).
in response to identifying an NFT including a product identifier matching the machine-readable code, determining, by a validation module of the processing server, the product associated with the machine-readable code is verified (see at least Collen, paragraph 0043; paragraph 0046 (“The authentication process validates that the seller 201 owns both the physical object and the linked NFT.”); paragraph 0049).
generating, by a generation module of the processing server, a verification result indicating that the product associated with the machine-readable code is verified, the verification result including the product identifier and product details (see at least Collen, paragraph 0049 (“After verification is complete, seller 201 may list the physical item on the marketplace.”)). Note: The content of the verification result is non-functional descriptive material. Nonfunctional descriptive material is generally not given patentable weight. See MPEP 2111.05. Any difference related merely to the meaning and information conveyed through labels (i.e., the type of the item) which does not explicitly alter or impact the steps of the method is nonfunctional descriptive material and does not patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art in terms of patentability.
transmitting, by a transmitting device of the processing server, the verification result to the first user computing device (see at least Collen, paragraph 0049 (The seller is only able to list the physical item on the marketplace after verification. This requires some sort of notification to the seller.)).
Collen does not explicitly teach, but Loreth, however, does teach:
executing, by a querying module of a processing server, a query on the blockchain to identify an NFT of the plurality of NFTs stored on the blockchain that includes a product identifier matching the machine-readable code (see at least Loreth, Abstract; paragraph 0107 (“Step 1016 comprises linking the ID tag of the physical article to the digital asset. When the ID tag is read by the device, the user interface of the device displays the cryptographically secured digital asset with the representation of the physical article. An online platform, e.g., platform 416, is displayed on the user interface of the device when the ID tag is read or recognized.”)).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Loreth’s method of using an ID tag of a physical article to retrieve a corresponding NFT with Collen’s marketplace for physical assets linked with digital assets. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate this feature for the purpose of authenticating a product in order to prevent counterfeiting. See Loreth, Abstract.
Claim 6:
Collen further teaches:
wherein the machine-readable code is a near-field communication chip attached to a product (see at least Collen, paragraph 0043 (“The marketplace may verify ownership of the NFT by comparing the address of the wallet with the listed owner in blockchain 108. The seller may verify ownership of the physical object 102 by scanning it with seller computing device 104. Physical object 102 may include a NFC chip configured to communicate with seller computing device 104.”); paragraph 0049 (“At 208, seller 201 may scan the NFT chip in the physical object to prove ownership of the object.”)).
Claim 8:
Collen further teaches:
wherein the determining the product associated with the machine-readable code is verified and the generating the verification result is executed by a smart contract on the blockchain (see at least Collen, paragraph 0049 (When a seller lists a product, part of the verification process is for a blockchain contract to be used to move the NFT into escrow.)).
Claim 10:
Claim 10 is rejected using the same rationale that was used for the rejection of claim 1.
Claim 12:
Claim 12 is rejected using the same rationale that was used for the rejection of claim 3. See rejection below.
Claim 13:
Claim 13 is rejected using the same rationale that was used for the rejection of claim 4. See rejection below.
Claim 14:
Claim 14 is rejected using the same rationale that was used for the rejection of claim 5. See rejection below.
Claim 15:
Claim 15 is rejected using the same rationale that was used for the rejection of claim 6.
Claim 17:
Claim 17 is rejected using the same rationale that was used for the rejection of claim 8.
Claim 19:
Claim 19 is rejected using the same rationale that was used for the rejection of claim 1.
Claims 2-5, 11, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Collen et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0193656 A1; Loreth et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2024/0412208 A1; and Kryvoshei et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2023/0274283 A1.
Claim 2:
Collen teaches:
receiving, by the receiving device of the processing server [from a merchant computing device], a transfer request message including transaction data, the transaction data including a user identifier and the product identifier matching the machine-readable code (see at least Collen, paragraph 0051 (“A buyer 207 may browse the marketplace and choose to purchase an entangled good listed. Once seller 201 has created the listing, buyer 207 (e.g., buyer computing device 112) may view the listing and transmit a message to API 203 indicating they wish to purchase the object.”)).
identifying, by the querying module of the processing server, a user account profile of the one or more user account profiles including the user identifier of the transaction message (see at least Collen, paragraph 0051; paragraph 0052 (In order for the marketplace to implement a transaction between the seller and buyer, the buyer would need to be identified and be registered with some sort of account.)).
generating, by a generation module of the processing server, a first blockchain transaction including the blockchain wallet address of the identified user account profile as a recipient address and the transaction data; and transmitting, by the transmitting device of the processing server, the first blockchain transaction to the blockchain (see at least Collen, paragraph 0055 (“Blockchain contracts may also release the NFT to buyer 207 at 224 and release the funds to seller 201 at 226.”)).
Collen does not explicitly teach, but Kryvoshei, however, does teach:
from a merchant computing device (see at least Kryvoshei, paragraph 0029 (“The seller device 104 can submit a request for transfer of ownership of the NFT being purchased to the blockchain network 108, which can be directly submitted to a blockchain node 110, be submitted to the processing server 102 for forwarding to a blockchain node 110 on behalf of the seller device 104, or to the processing server 102 for processing in cases where the processing server 102 can be a blockchain node 110 in the blockchain network 108.”)).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Kryvoshei’s method of a seller providing a transfer request with Collen’s marketplace for physical assets linked with digital assets. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate this feature for the purpose of providing a way for the seller to initiate the transaction. It would be obvious for either party to the transaction to initiate the transaction by requesting a transfer.
Claim 3:
Collen further teaches:
hosting, by the processing server, a digital marketplace for exchange of products and NFTs associated with the products (see at least Collen, paragraph 0049 (“After steps 202-208, the marketplace may verify that seller 201 owns both the physical object and the linked NFT.”)).
receiving, by the receiving device of the processing server from the first user computing device, a product listing request including at least the machine-readable code and a user identifier identifying the first user (see at least Collen, paragraph 0049 (“At 208, seller 201 may scan the NFT chip in the physical object to prove ownership of the object. After steps 202-208, the marketplace may verify that seller 201 owns both the physical object and the linked NFT. After verification is complete, seller 201 may list the physical item on the marketplace. At 210, seller 201 may transmit a message to API 203 indicating they wish to list the physical item and NFT on the marketplace.”)).
receiving, by the receiving device of the processing server, a product result including metadata of the second NFT including the product identifier matching the machine-readable code (see at least Collen, paragraph 0046 (seller proves ownership); paragraph 0049 (“At 208, seller 201 may scan the NFT chip in the physical object to prove ownership of the object. After steps 202-208, the marketplace may verify that seller 201 owns both the physical object and the linked NFT. After verification is complete, seller 201 may list the physical item on the marketplace. At 210, seller 201 may transmit a message to API 203 indicating they wish to list the physical item and NFT on the marketplace.”)).
generating, by the generation module of the processing server, a product listing for a product associated with the identified second NFT, the product listing including the metadata of the identified second NFT and the first user identifier included in the product listing request; and listing, by the processing server, the product listing on the digital marketplace (see at least Collen, paragraph 0049 (“After verification is complete, seller 201 may list the physical item on the marketplace. At 210, seller 201 may transmit a message to API 203 indicating they wish to list the physical item and NFT on the marketplace.”)). Note: The content of the product listing is non-functional descriptive material. Nonfunctional descriptive material is generally not given patentable weight. See MPEP 2111.05. Any difference related merely to the meaning and information conveyed through labels (i.e., the type of the item) which does not explicitly alter or impact the steps of the method is nonfunctional descriptive material and does not patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art in terms of patentability.
Collen does not explicitly teach, but Loreth, however, does teach:
executing, by the querying module of the processing server, a query on the blockchain to identify a second NFT of the plurality of NFTs stored on the blockchain that includes a product identifier matching the machine-readable code of the product listing request (see at least Loreth, Abstract; paragraph 0107 (“Step 1016 comprises linking the ID tag of the physical article to the digital asset. When the ID tag is read by the device, the user interface of the device displays the cryptographically secured digital asset with the representation of the physical article. An online platform, e.g., platform 416, is displayed on the user interface of the device when the ID tag is read or recognized.”)).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Loreth’s method of using an ID tag of a physical article to retrieve a corresponding NFT with Collen’s marketplace for physical assets linked with digital assets. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate this feature for the purpose of authenticating a product in order to prevent counterfeiting. See Loreth, Abstract.
Claim 4:
Collen further teaches:
receiving, by the receiving device of the processing server from a second user computing device, a product purchase request, the product purchase request including at least the product identifier included in the product listing, the user identifier included in the product listing, a user identifier of the second user, and a transaction amount (see at least Collen, paragraph 0051 (“A buyer 207 may browse the marketplace and choose to purchase an entangled good listed. Once seller 201 has created the listing, buyer 207 (e.g., buyer computing device 112) may view the listing and transmit a message to API 203 indicating they wish to purchase the object.”)).
identifying, by the querying module of the processing server, a user account profile of the one or more user account profiles including the user identifier of the second user included in the product purchase request; identifying, by the querying module of the processing server, a user account profile of the one or more user account profiles including the user identifier included in the product listing (see at least Collen, paragraphs 0051-0052 (In order to implement the purchase, the system would need to identify the buyer and seller and their associated information.)).
generating, by the generation module of the processing server, a second blockchain transaction including the blockchain wallet address of the identified user account profile of the second user as a sending address, a blockchain wallet address of an escrow account as a recipient address, the identified user account including the user identifier included in the product listing, and the transaction amount; and transmitting, by the transmitting device of the processing server, the second blockchain transaction to the blockchain (see at least Collen, paragraph 0055 (“Upon successful quality checks and inspection, the marketplace or buyer 207 may “fulfill” the item, thereby releasing the digital NFT to buyer 207 and the funds to seller 201. In the present embodiment, seller 201 may ship the physical item to buyer 207 at 222. Blockchain contracts may also release the NFT to buyer 207 at 224 and release the funds to seller 201 at 226. At this point, ownership rights of both the physical object and NFT have been transferred to buyer 207.”)).
Claim 5:
Claim 5 recites:
receiving, by the receiving device of the processing server from the second user computing device, a second product verification request message including a second machine-readable code; executing, by the querying module of a processing server, a query on the blockchain to identify an NFT of the plurality of NFTs stored on the blockchain that includes a product identifier matching the second machine-readable code; receiving, by the receiving device of the processing server, a verification result including metadata of the NFT including the product identifier matching the second machine-readable code; transmitting, by a transmitting device of the processing server, the verification result to the second user computing device; generating, by the generation module of the processing server, a third blockchain transaction including the blockchain wallet address of the of the escrow account as the sending address, a blockchain wallet address of the identified user account including the user identifier included in the product listing as the recipient address, and the transaction amount; and transmitting, by the transmitting device of the processing server, the third blockchain transaction to the blockchain.
These limitations are repeating the verification and transaction process that is previously recited in claims 1-4 and disclosed in the prior art. These limitations are rejected for the same reasons as above. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate this second iteration of the process with Collen’s marketplace for physical assets linked with digital assets. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate this feature for the purpose of proceeding with a second verification and transaction. Additionally, it is obvious to repeat steps. See In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) (Claims at issue were directed to a water-tight masonry structure wherein a water seal of flexible material fills the joints which form between adjacent pours of concrete. The claimed water seal has a “web” which lies in the joint, and a plurality of “ribs” projecting outwardly from each side of the web into one of the adjacent concrete slabs. The prior art disclosed a flexible water stop for preventing passage of water between masses of concrete in the shape of a plus sign (+). Although the reference did not disclose a plurality of ribs, the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.).
Claim 11:
Claim 11 is rejected using the same rationale that was used for the rejection of claim 2.
Claim 20:
Claim 20 is rejected using the same rationale that was used for the rejection of claim 2.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Collen et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0193656 A1; Loreth et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2024/0412208 A1; Kryvoshei et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2023/0274283 A1; Spence et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2023/0123311 A1; and Brown et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2024/0127232 A1.
Claim 9:
Collen does not explicitly teach, but Spence, however, does teach:
wherein the blockchain wallet address included in each of the one or more user account profiles is a tokenized payment card (see at least Spence, paragraph 0023 (“The digital wallet on the computing device 102 may store a tokenized payment card that is associated with a transaction account for which the consumer is authorized to fund payment transactions.”)).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Spence’s tokenized payment card with Collen’s marketplace for physical assets linked with digital assets. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate this feature for the purpose of reducing the likelihood of fraud by providing a secure payment method.
Collen does not explicitly teach, but Brown, however, does teach:
wherein the identified user account profile of the second user includes a first preferred transaction currency and the identified user account profile of the user identifier included in the product listing includes a second preferred transaction currency; and wherein the generating the second blockchain transaction includes: converting, by the processing server, the transaction amount from the first preferred transaction currency to the second preferred transaction currency (see at least Brown, paragraph 0038 (“A novel entity, the transfer facilitator, may be provided and may facilitate (at least) the ability to manage the relationship between the security device and the user's wallet; additionally or alternatively, the transfer facilitator may facilitate, enable or provide the conversion of cryptocurrency to a preferred or designated recipient currency (for example, fiat currency); the recipient currency may, in some embodiments, be referred to as a settlement currency. The transfer facilitator may generate or provide the user's wallet.”)).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Brown’s method of using currency preferences with Collen’s marketplace for physical assets linked with digital assets. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate this feature for the purpose of allowing each party to the transaction to participate using a preferred currency so that the parties do not have to do any independent currency conversion.
Claims 7 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Collen et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0193656 A1; Loreth et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2024/0412208 A1; and Spence et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2023/0123311 A1.
Claim 7:
Collen does not explicitly teach, but Spence, however, does teach:
wherein the one or more user account profiles includes a tokenized payment card (see at least Spence, paragraph 0023 (“The digital wallet on the computing device 102 may store a tokenized payment card that is associated with a transaction account for which the consumer is authorized to fund payment transactions.”)).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Spence’s tokenized payment card with Collen’s marketplace for physical assets linked with digital assets. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate this feature for the purpose of reducing the likelihood of fraud by providing a secure payment method.
Claim 16:
Claim 16 is rejected using the same rationale that was used for the rejection of claim 7.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Collen et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0193656 A1; Loreth et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2024/0412208 A1; Spence et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2023/0123311 A1; and Brown et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2024/0127232 A1.
Claim 18:
Claim 18 is rejected using the same rationale that was used for the rejection of claim 9. See rejection above.
Relevant Prior Art
The following references are relevant to Applicant’s invention:
Siu, U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2025/0005592 A1. This reference teaches generating an NFT that corresponds to an authenticated item for sale at an online marketplace.
“NFC and NFT – The Perfect Pairing for the Luxury Market,” https://seritag.com/news/nfc-and-nft-perfect-pairing-for-the-luxury-market (Nov. 7, 2022). This reference teaches how NFC tags and NFTs work together.
“Phygital Market at a Glance,” https://medium.com/@gotbit_insights/phygital-market-at-a-glance-eaab7a18c9b1 (Nov. 2023). This reference discusses phygital NFTs which are tied to tangible assets and used to verify their authenticity and ownership.
Email Communications
Per MPEP 502.03, Applicant may authorize email communications by filing Form PTO/SB/439, available at https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/sb0439.pdf, via the USPTO patent electronic filing system.
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 extension fee 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 ELIZABETH H ROSEN whose telephone number is (571) 270-1850 and email address is elizabeth.rosen@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 10 AM ET - 7 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, Michael Anderson, can be reached at 571-270-0508. 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.
/ELIZABETH H ROSEN/Primary Examiner, 3693
Prosecution Insights