DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The following is a non-final office action in response to the election filed 2/12/2026.
Applicant elected Group 1, Claim 1-8 in response to the election requirement and withdraws claims 9-18.
The applicant's claim for benefit of provisional application US 63/602222, filed 11/22/2023 has been received and acknowledged.
Claims 1-18 are currently pending and have been examined.
Specification
Abstract
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the abstract is over 150 words long. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Interpretation
Based on the review of the specification:
The term ‘platform’/ platforms is interpreted as software (See at least, [6-7], [10], [35], [69-71] [88]) ;
The term ‘administrator’ is : (see [75] : is “referred to … as a creator… is an entity or organization …could be the (UNFCCC), the EU, a government … or any organization operating a CCT system…” );
The term ‘emitters’ is: (see [76]: “…are carbon-emitting entities participating in the platform… are carbon-emitting entities participating in the platform..”);
The term ‘modules’ is interpreted as software (See at least, [6-7], [70], [78], [`114-115], [127-129])
The term ‘measurement device’ is interpreted as either hardware or software or a combination of both (See [9], [24], [73-74], [85], [100-102], [117-119]; [125]; Fig. 1 and 5 )
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 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
When considering subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. 101, (1) it must be determined whether the claim is directed to one of the four statutory categories of invention, i.e., process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. If the claim does fall within one of the statutory categories, (2a) it must then be determined whether the claim is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., law of nature, natural phenomenon, and abstract idea), and if so (2b), it must additionally be determined whether the claim is a patent-eligible application of the exception. If an abstract idea is present in the claim, any element or combination of elements in the claim must be sufficient to ensure that the claim amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. Examples of abstract ideas include fundamental economic practices; certain methods of organizing human activities; an idea itself; and mathematical relationships/formulas. Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank International, et al., 573 U.S. ____ (2014).
The claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e. a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. In the instant case, the claim(s) as a whole, considering all claim elements both individually and in combination, do not amount to significantly more than an abstract idea.
(1) In the instant case, the claims are directed towards a platform for automation of carbon credits. In the instant case, Claims 1-8 are directed to software (i.e. various modules).
As written using broadest reasonable interpretation, invention is claiming software per se which is non-statutory subject matter. Therefore, claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Though the subject matter eligibility analysis under the interpretation of the claimed platform as software could end at Step 1, in the interest of compact prosecution, the analysis continues:
(2a) Prong 1: The automation/analysis of carbon credits is categorized in/akin to the abstract idea subject matter grouping of: methods of organizing human activity) [organizing human activity (commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations)]. As such, the claims include an abstract idea.
The specific limitations of the invention are (a) identified to encompass the abstract idea include:
Claim 1. A platform for automation of carbon credits using smart contracts, the platform comprising:
an agreements module configured to … a plurality of parameters from an administrator to assign a plurality of credits to a corresponding plurality of emitters using an assignment transaction to be included in a transaction block in a cryptographically verifiable ledger;
a suspension module configured to selectively suspend any of the plurality of emitters by generating a suspension transaction to be included in a transaction block in the cryptographically verifiable ledger;
a registration module configured to register the plurality of emitters using a plurality of registration transactions to be included in a transaction block in the cryptographically verifiable ledger;
a trading module configured to generate a plurality of trading transactions to be included in a transaction block on the cryptographically verifiable ledger, each of the plurality of trading transactions corresponding to a purchase or sale of carbon credits as between the plurality of emitters;
a measurement module, wherein the measurement module is private and exclusive to the administrator and to an emitter of the plurality of emitters that generated emissions measured by the measurement module, wherein the measurement module is communicatively coupled to a plurality of measurement devices arranged amongst the plurality of emitters, and wherein the plurality of measurement devices are configured to automatically report carbon generation, such that the measurement module generates a measurement transaction corresponding to an amount of carbon measured by the plurality of measurement devices to be stored on the cryptographically verifiable ledger based upon a level of emissions output by the plurality of emitters.
As stated above, this abstract idea falls into the (b) subject matter grouping of: methods of organizing human activity.
Prong 2: When considered individually and in combination, the instant claims are do not integrate the exception into a practical application because the modules recite.. the steps of …selectively suspend… ; register.. emitters…; ..generate…; … generates.. do not apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that that imposes a meaningful limitation on the judicial exception (i.e. the abstract idea).
The instant recited claims including additional elements (i.e. receive…) do not improve the functioning of the computer or improve another technology or technical field nor do they recite meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The limitations merely recite: “apply it” (or an equivalent) or merely include instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea or generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use ( See MPEP 2106.05 (f) and (g))
(2b) In the instant case, Claims 1-8 are directed to software.
.Additionally, the claims (independent and dependent) do not include additional elements that individually or in combination are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception of abstract idea (i.e. provide an inventive concept). As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element(s) of: (modules ) merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea or merely add insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception or merely uses generic computing elements to perform well known, routine, and conventional functions. (See MPEP 2106.05 (d), (f) and (g)) ( Specification, [6-7], [70], [78], [`114-115], [127-129] modules)
The dependent claims have also been examined and do not correct the deficiencies of the independent claims.
It is noted that claims (2-8) introduces the additional elements of (various wherein clauses further defining the modules..(Claims 2, 6, 7, 8), the…administrator… and modules (Claim 3); … measurement devices.. (Claim 4) and further comprising a blockchain oracle … (Claim 5). These elements are not a practical application of the judicial exception because the limitations merely recite: “apply it” (or an equivalent) or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea or generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. (See MPEP 2106.05 (d), (f) and (g)). Further these limitations taken alone or in combination with the abstract do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea alone because these elements amount “apply it” (or an equivalent) or merely include instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea or generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use or merely uses generic computing elements/technology to perform well known, routine, and conventional functions. ( See MPEP 2106.05 (d), (f) and (g) Specification, platform/platforms [6-7], [10], [35], [69-71] [88]; modules [6-7], [70], [78], [`114-115], [127-129]; measurement device [9], [24], [73-74], [85], [100-102], [117-119]; [125]; Fig. 1 and 5).
Therefore, claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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 of this title, 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, 2, 3, 4, 7, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over non-patent literature, CARBON TRADE EXCHANGE RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR THE VOLUNTARY CARBON MARKET 22 May 2018. (https://ctxglobal.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/CarbonTradeExchangeRules_20180522.pdf) hereinafter referred to as CTE Rules further in view of US 20210314143 A1, Conner hereinafter referred to as Conner.
Claim 1
CTE Rules discloses A platform for automation of carbon credits using smart contracts, the platform comprising:
an agreements module configured to receive a plurality of parameters from an administrator to assign a plurality of credits to a corresponding plurality of emitters using an assignment transaction …; (See at least CTE Rules, 2.1 Carbon Trade Exchange… acts as a clearing house and third party record keeper of transactions…32…Limitation of Liability… hardware or software… )
a suspension module configured to selectively suspend any of the plurality of emitters by generating a suspension transaction …; (See at least CTE Rules, 3.6 Member’s access to the CTX Trading Platform will be cancelled in the event that the CTX Trading Agreement is terminated for any breach of the terms and conditions…. 30.2 Carbon Trade Exchange or the Member may terminate the CTX Trading Agreement in the event that either party fails to comply with any of its obligations…11. Changes to Membership Status and Suspension…32…Limitation of Liability… hardware or software… )
a registration module configured to register the plurality of emitters using a plurality of registration transactions ….; (See at least CTE Rules, 3. Becoming a Member… 3.1-3.7 In order to become a Member and a participant on the CTX Trading Platform, an applicant must complete and online Application….verify the participant’s application and supporting documents… 5. Registry Allowance Account… Approved Registry account holder… Registry Allowance Account… 32…Limitation of Liability… hardware or software… )
a trading module configured to generate a plurality of trading transactions …, each of the plurality of trading transactions corresponding to a purchase or sale of carbon credits as between the plurality of emitters; (See at least CTE Rules, 6. Cash Settlement and Trading Account… 9. Commencement of Trading on the CTX Trading Platform… 9.1 internet based interface… Section 2 Trading on the CTX Trading Platform… 12-24, 26…32…Limitation of Liability… hardware or software… )
CTE Rules does not directly disclose the following; Conner teaches:
…to be included in a transaction block in a cryptographically verifiable ledger…(See at least Conner, [16] device comprises a sensor that generates a stream measurement data and computing processor… register blockchain ledger…)
a measurement module, wherein the measurement module is private and exclusive to the administrator and to an emitter of the plurality of emitters that generated emissions measured by the measurement module, wherein the measurement module is communicatively coupled to a plurality of measurement devices arranged amongst the plurality of emitters, and wherein the plurality of measurement devices are configured to automatically report carbon generation, such that the measurement module generates a measurement transaction corresponding to an amount of carbon measured by the plurality of measurement devices to be stored on the cryptographically verifiable ledger based upon a level of emissions output by the plurality of emitters. (See at least Conner, [16] device comprises a sensor that generates a stream measurement data and computing processor… register blockchain ledger…[54-55] sensors…[68]…measures for carbon-based allowances or offsets can be calculated and stored in a blockchain based architecture…).
Furthermore, the Supreme Court has supported in KSR International Co. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550US___, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007), that merely applying a known technique to a known method, yield predictable results, render the claimed invention obvious over such combination. In the instant case, CTE Rules discloses the platform and method upon which the carbon trade exchange is based including the rules governing the agreement and trading on the exchange. Conner teaches a method and system of recording carbon credit transaction in a distributed ledger/blockchain including sensor/measurement device data. One of ordinary skill in the art would clearly recognize that this combination would lead to a predictable result (i.e. a carbon trade exchange which uses a distributed ledger/blockchain and includes sensor/measurement device data.). As such the claimed invention is obvious over CTE Rules/Conner.
Claim 2
CTE Rules and Conner disclose the invention as claimed above in Claim 1.
CTE Rules does not directly disclose the following; Conner teaches:
wherein each of the agreements module, the suspension module, the registration module, the trading module, and the carbon measurement module are configured to create smart contracts that generate transaction blocks on the cryptographically verifiable ledger. (See at least Conner, [86] blockchain may implement through a smart contract…)
Claim 3
CTE Rules and Conner disclose the invention as claimed above in Claim 1.
CTE Rules further discloses:
wherein the administrator is further configured to assign a plurality of credits to one or more green projects, and:
the suspension module is further configured to selectively suspend any of the one or more green projects by generating a suspension transaction to be included …; (See at least CTE Rules, 3.6 Member’s access to the CTX Trading Platform will be cancelled in the event that the CTX Trading Agreement is terminated for any breach of the terms and conditions…. 30.2 Carbon Trade Exchange or the Member may terminate the CTX Trading Agreement in the event that either party fails to comply with any of its obligations…11. Changes to Membership Status and Suspension…32…Limitation of Liability… hardware or software… )
the registration module is further configured to register the one or more green projects using a plurality of registration transactions …(See at least CTE Rules, 3. Becoming a Member… 3.1-3.7 In order to become a Member and a participant on the CTX Trading Platform, an applicant must complete and online Application….verify the participant’s application and supporting documents… 5. Registry Allowance Account… Approved Registry account holder… Registry Allowance Account…32…Limitation of Liability… hardware or software… )
the plurality of trading transactions … correspond to a purchase or sale of carbon credits including the one or more green projects. (See at least CTE Rules, 6. Cash Settlement and Trading Account… 9. Commencement of Trading on the CTX Trading Platform… 9.1 internet based interface… Section 2 Trading on the CTX Trading Platform… 12-24, 26…32…Limitation of Liability… hardware or software… )
CTE Rules does not directly disclose the following; Conner teaches:
…to be included in a transaction block in a cryptographically verifiable ledger…(See at least Conner, [16] device comprises a sensor that generates a stream measurement data and computing processor… register blockchain ledger…)
Claim 4
CTE Rules and Conner disclose the invention as claimed above in Claim 1.
CTE Rules does not directly disclose the following; Conner teaches:
further comprising the plurality of measurement devices arranged at the plurality of emitters to provide carbon emission measurement data to the measurement module. (See at least Conner, [16] device comprises a sensor that generates a stream measurement data and computing processor… register blockchain ledger…[54-55] sensors…[68]…measures for carbon-based allowances or offsets can be calculated and stored in a blockchain based architecture…).
Claim 7
CTE Rules and Conner disclose the invention as claimed above in Claim 1.
CTE Rules does not directly disclose the following; Conner teaches:
wherein the trading module is configured to implement smart contracts that trade carbon credits with the plurality of emitters. (See at least Conner, [16] device comprises a sensor that generates a stream measurement data and computing processor… register blockchain ledger…[54-55] sensors…[68]…measures for carbon-based allowances or offsets can be calculated and stored in a blockchain based architecture…).
Claim 8
CTE Rules and Conner disclose the invention as claimed above in Claim 1.
CTE Rules further discloses:
wherein the registration module is configured to register the plurality of emitters. (See at least CTE Rules, 3. Becoming a Member… 3.1-3.7 In order to become a Member and a participant on the CTX Trading Platform, an applicant must complete and online Application….verify the participant’s application and supporting documents… 5. Registry Allowance Account… Approved Registry account holder… Registry Allowance Account…32…Limitation of Liability… hardware or software… )
Claims 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CTE Rules in view of Conner further in view US 11288736 B1, Jette et al. hereinafter referred to as Jette.
Claim 5
CTE Rules and Conner disclose the invention as claimed above in Claim 4.
CTE Rules does not directly disclose the following; Conner teaches:
further comprising a ….. to the plurality of measurement devices and the measurement module. (See at least Conner, [16] device comprises a sensor that generates a stream measurement data and computing processor… register blockchain ledger…[54-55] sensors…[68]…measures for carbon-based allowances or offsets can be calculated and stored in a blockchain based architecture…).
CTE Rules does not directly disclose the following; Jette teaches:
…blockchain oracle communicatively coupled… (See at least Jette, Fig. 8 Oracle Contract… C10L21-33 smart contracts… oracles… C15L8-26, oracles…to provide authorization on the block chain…)
Furthermore, the Supreme Court has supported in KSR International Co. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550US___, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007), that merely applying a known technique to a known method, yield predictable results, render the claimed invention obvious over such combination. In the instant case, CTE Rules discloses the platform and method upon which the carbon trade exchange is based including the rules governing the agreement and trading on the exchange. Conner teaches a method and system of recording carbon credit transaction in a distributed ledger/blockchain including sensor/measurement device data. Jette teaches a method and system of blockchain-based transactions including known techniques/components such as an oracle and web3. One of ordinary skill in the art would clearly recognize that this combination would lead to a predictable result (i.e. a carbon trade exchange which uses a distributed ledger/blockchain and includes sensor/measurement device data including known techniques/components such as an oracle and web3.) As such the claimed invention is obvious over CTE Rules/Conner.
Claim 6
CTE Rules and Conner disclose the invention as claimed above in Claim 1.
CTE Rules does not directly disclose the following; Jette teaches:
wherein the agreements module is communicatively coupled to web3 storage to receive an agreements hash therefrom. (See at least Jette, Fig. 3, hash ….C16L44-67 hash of block…C26L55-C27L3 web3 bridge component… transaction interface C30L55-C31L50 Market marketer may provide input, approve a transaction or otherwise interact with core contract… through a blockchain network or web3 bridge component… )
Furthermore, the Supreme Court has supported in KSR International Co. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550US___, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007), that merely applying a known technique to a known method, yield predictable results, render the claimed invention obvious over such combination. In the instant case, CTE Rules discloses the platform and method upon which the carbon trade exchange is based including the rules governing the agreement and trading on the exchange. Conner teaches a method and system of recording carbon credit transaction in a distributed ledger/blockchain including sensor/measurement device data. Jette teaches a method and system of blockchain-based transactions including known techniques/components such as an oracle and web3. One of ordinary skill in the art would clearly recognize that this combination would lead to a predictable result (i.e. a carbon trade exchange which uses a distributed ledger/blockchain and includes sensor/measurement device data including known techniques/components such as an oracle and web3.) As such the claimed invention is obvious over CTE Rules/Conner.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20120095897 A1, System and method for trading of carbon units – carbon trading exchange
US 20200027096 A1, carbon credit transaction system using a distributed ledger
US 20220101430 A1, blockchain-based carbon credit database
WO 2005070065 A2, carbon credit marketing system
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ASHA PUTTAIA H whose telephone number is (571)270-1352. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 am to 5:30 pm.
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, Abhishek Vyas can be reached on 571-270-1836. 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.
/ASHA PUTTAIA H/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3691