DETAILED ACTION
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
This action is in reply to non-provisional patent application filed on 11/22/24 and IDS filed on 5/19/25. Claims 1-20 are pending and examined.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. KR10-2024-0071761, filed on 5/31/24.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) were submitted on 11/22/24 and 5/19/25. The submissions are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements were considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. (Step 1) The claims recite a process (claim 1), an apparatus (claim 15) and an article of manufacture (claim 20). For the purposes of this analysis, representative claim 15 is addressed. (Step 2A, prong 1) Abstract ideas are in bold below, and represent organizing human activity as a method of creating accounts for financial transactions, as are all a form of commercial or legal interactions.
An apparatus comprising:
a communication interface configured to communicate with a terminal of a user; at least one processor; and at least one memory in which instructions to be executed by the at least one processor are stored, wherein the at least one processor is configured to, when the instructions are executed by the at least one processor:
acquire a request for generating a first account for an NFT-related service from the terminal of the user, the request for generating the first account indicating another service distinguished from the NFT-related service;
acquire information about a second account corresponding to an account of the user in the another service;
generate the first account of the user for the NFT-related service based on the information about the second account;
generate a first digital asset wallet of the user and associate information about the first digital asset wallet with the first account of the user
(Step 2A prong 2) The additional elements are as follows:
“An apparatus comprising”, “a communication interface configured to communicate with a terminal of a user; at least one processor; and at least one memory in which instructions to be executed by the at least one processor are stored, wherein the at least one processor is configured to, when the instructions are executed by the at least one processor. This is an extra solution activity, akin to data gathering.
“an NFT-related service”, “the terminal of the user” and “another service distinguished from the NFT-related service”, This is merely “apply it” as the “NFT-related service” and “terminal of the user” are claimed at a high level of generality, receives the information, performs the abstract idea, and outputs the results. Furthermore, the “NFT-related service” is also general linking as the “NFT-related service” does no more than link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use.
“digital asset”. This is also general linking as the “digital asset” does no more than link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use.
(Step 2B) The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration into a practical application, the additional elements amount do no more than provide mere instructions to apply the abstract idea of using generic computer components. The claim elements when considered separately and in an ordered combination, do not add significantly more than implementing the abstract idea of creating accounts for financial transactions financial asset account and an associated wallet, over a generic computer network with generic computing elements, and generic hardware.
Analysis of dependent claim 2 recited additional elements.
The additional elements are as follows:
“transmitting information about at least one of the first account or the first digital asset wallet to the terminal of the user”. This is merely “apply it” as “transmitting” is claimed at a high level of generality, receives the information, performs the abstract idea, and outputs the results.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration into a practical application, the additional elements amount do no more than provide mere instructions to apply the abstract idea of using generic computer components. The claim elements when considered separately and in an ordered combination, do not add significantly more than implementing the abstract idea of creating accounts for financial transactions financial asset account and an associated wallet, over a generic computer network with generic computing elements, and generic hardware.
Analysis of dependent claim 3 recited additional elements.
The additional elements are as follows:
“causing the information about at least one of the first account or the first digital asset wallet to be displayed on the terminal of the user”. This is merely “apply it” as “causing … to be displayed …” is claimed at a high level of generality, receives the information, performs the abstract idea, and outputs the results.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration into a practical application, the additional elements amount do no more than provide mere instructions to apply the abstract idea of using generic computer components. The claim elements when considered separately and in an ordered combination, do not add significantly more than implementing the abstract idea of creating accounts for financial transactions financial asset account and an associated wallet, over a generic computer network with generic computing elements, and generic hardware.
Analysis of dependent claims 4 and 16 recited “acquiring a wallet link request from the terminal of the user for associating a second digital asset wallet of the user with the first account” and “associating information about the second digital asset wallet with the first account of the user”, additional details which further narrow the abstract idea and additional elements.
The additional elements are as follows:
“the terminal of the user”. This is merely “apply it” as the “terminal of the user” is claimed at a high level of generality, receives the information, performs the abstract idea, and outputs the results.
“digital asset”. This is also general linking as the “digital asset” does no more than link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use.
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration into a practical application, the additional elements amount do no more than provide mere instructions to apply the abstract idea of using generic computer components. The claim elements when considered separately and in an ordered combination, do not add significantly more than implementing the abstract idea of creating accounts for financial transactions financial asset account and an associated wallet, over a generic computer network with generic computing elements, and generic hardware.
Analysis of dependent claim 5 recited “in response to associating the information about the second digital asset wallet with the first account, causing the information about the first digital asset wallet not to be associated with the first account”, additional details which further narrow the abstract idea and additional elements.
The additional elements are as follows:
“digital asset”. This is also general linking as the “digital asset” does no more than link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use.
“causing the information about the first digital asset wallet not to be associated with the first account”. This is merely “apply it” as the “causing … not to be associated …” is claimed at a high level of generality, receives the information, performs the abstract idea, and outputs the results.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration into a practical application, the additional elements amount do no more than provide mere instructions to apply the abstract idea of using generic computer components. The claim elements when considered separately and in an ordered combination, do not add significantly more than implementing the abstract idea of creating accounts for financial transactions financial asset account and an associated wallet, over a generic computer network with generic computing elements, and generic hardware.
Analysis of dependent claim 6 and 17 recited “acquiring a request for ticket purchase through a fiat currency from the terminal of the user”, “in response to the request for ticket purchase, determining approval of payment for a ticket through the fiat currency” and “transmitting an NFT representing the ticket to the first digital asset wallet of the user by executing a smart contract corresponding to the ticket through a blockchain network”, additional details which further narrow the abstract idea and additional elements.
The additional elements are as follows:
“the terminal of the user”. This is merely “apply it” as the “the terminal of the user” is claimed at a high level of generality, receives the information, performs the abstract idea, and outputs the results.
“transmitting an NFT representing the ticket to the first digital asset wallet of the user by executing a smart contract corresponding to the ticket through a blockchain network”. This is merely “apply it” as the “transmitting” and “executing a smart contract … through a blockchain network” is claimed at a high level of generality, receives the information, performs the abstract idea, and outputs the results. Furthermore, the “smart contract” and “blockchain network” do no more than link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration into a practical application, the additional elements amount do no more than provide mere instructions to apply the abstract idea of using generic computer components. The claim elements when considered separately and in an ordered combination, do not add significantly more than implementing the abstract idea of creating accounts for financial transactions financial asset account and an associated wallet, over a generic computer network with generic computing elements, and generic hardware.
Analysis of dependent claims 7 and 18, recited additional details which only further narrow the abstract idea and do not add any additional features, alone or in combination, that would provide a practical application or provide significantly more.
Analysis of dependent claim 8 recited additional elements
The additional elements are as follows:
“recording, on a blockchain, information associated with payment for the ticket through the fiat currency through the blockchain network”. This is merely “apply it” as the “recording, on a blockchain, … through the blockchain network” is claimed at a high level of generality, receives the information, performs the abstract idea, and outputs the results. This is also general linking as the “blockchain” and “blockchain network” do no more than link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration into a practical application, the additional elements amount do no more than provide mere instructions to apply the abstract idea of using generic computer components. The claim elements when considered separately and in an ordered combination, do not add significantly more than implementing the abstract idea of creating accounts for financial transactions financial asset account and an associated wallet, over a generic computer network with generic computing elements, and generic hardware.
Analysis of dependent claim 9 recited “wherein the determining approval of payment for the ticket includes”, “acquiring information indicating approval of payment for the ticket from an external payment server” and “determining approval of payment for the ticket through a fiat currency of the user based on the information indicating approval of payment for the ticket acquired from the external payment server”, additional details which further narrow the abstract idea and additional elements.
The additional elements are as follows:
“an external payment server”. This is merely “apply it” as the “external payment server” is claimed at a high level of generality, receives the information, performs the abstract idea, and outputs the results.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration into a practical application, the additional elements amount do no more than provide mere instructions to apply the abstract idea of using generic computer components. The claim elements when considered separately and in an ordered combination, do not add significantly more than implementing the abstract idea of creating accounts for financial transactions financial asset account and an associated wallet, over a generic computer network with generic computing elements, and generic hardware.
Analysis of dependent claim 10 recited “in case that the user corresponds to an owner of an NFT representing the ticket, providing information about the ticket to the terminal of the user”, additional details which further narrow the abstract idea and additional elements.
The additional elements are as follows:
“an NFT representing the ticket”. This is general linking as the “NFT representing the ticket” does no more than link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use.
“the terminal of the user”. This is merely “apply it” as the “terminal of the user” is claimed at a high level of generality, receives the information, performs the abstract idea, and outputs the results.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration into a practical application, the additional elements amount do no more than provide mere instructions to apply the abstract idea of using generic computer components. The claim elements when considered separately and in an ordered combination, do not add significantly more than implementing the abstract idea of creating accounts for financial transactions financial asset account and an associated wallet, over a generic computer network with generic computing elements, and generic hardware.
Analysis of dependent claim 11 recited “wherein the generating the first account includes”, “determining whether the user already owns an account for the NFT-related service” and “in response to the determination that the user does not already own an account for the NFT-related service, generating the first account of the user for the NFT-related service”, additional details which further narrow the abstract idea and additional elements.
The additional elements are as follows:
“the NFT-related service”. This is general linking as the “NFT-related service” does no more than link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration into a practical application, the additional elements amount do no more than provide mere instructions to apply the abstract idea of using generic computer components. The claim elements when considered separately and in an ordered combination, do not add significantly more than implementing the abstract idea of creating accounts for financial transactions financial asset account and an associated wallet, over a generic computer network with generic computing elements, and generic hardware.
Analysis of dependent claim 12 recited additional elements.
The additional elements are as follows:
“wherein in response to the execution of the smart contract, the smart contract is configured to issue the NFT representing the ticket and transfer the issued NFT to the first digital asset wallet of the user”. This is merely “apply it” as the “the executing of the smart contract”, “the smart contract is configured to”, “issue” and “transfer” are claimed at a high level of generality, receives the information, performs the abstract idea, and outputs the results. Furthermore, the “smart contract” and “NFT” do no more than link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration into a practical application, the additional elements amount do no more than provide mere instructions to apply the abstract idea of using generic computer components. The claim elements when considered separately and in an ordered combination, do not add significantly more than implementing the abstract idea of creating accounts for financial transactions financial asset account and an associated wallet, over a generic computer network with generic computing elements, and generic hardware.
Analysis of dependent claim 13 recited additional elements.
The additional elements are as follows:
“wherein in response to the execution of the smart contract, the smart contract is configured to transfer, to the first digital asset wallet of the user, the NFT which has been issued by the smart contract before the execution of the smart contract and represents the ticket”. This is merely “apply it” as the “the executing of the smart contract”, “the smart contract is configured to”, “transfer” are claimed at a high level of generality, receives the information, performs the abstract idea, and outputs the results. Furthermore, the “smart contract”, “digital asset” and “NFT” do no more than link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration into a practical application, the additional elements amount do no more than provide mere instructions to apply the abstract idea of using generic computer components. The claim elements when considered separately and in an ordered combination, do not add significantly more than implementing the abstract idea of creating accounts for financial transactions financial asset account and an associated wallet, over a generic computer network with generic computing elements, and generic hardware.
Analysis of dependent claims 14 and 19 recited ”based on at least one of a transferor, a transferee, or the NFT representing the ticket, determine whether the transferor permits transfer of the NFT representing the ticket from a digital asset wallet of the transferor to a digital asset wallet of the transferee” and “in response to the determination that the transfer is permitted, transfer the NFT representing the ticket from the digital asset wallet of the transferor to the digital asset wallet of the transferee”, additional details which further narrow the abstract idea and additional elements.
The additional elements are as follows:
“the NFT representing the ticket” and “digital asset”. This is general linking as the “NFT representing the ticket” and “digital asset” do no more than link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration into a practical application, the additional elements amount do no more than provide mere instructions to apply the abstract idea of using generic computer components. The claim elements when considered separately and in an ordered combination, do not add significantly more than implementing the abstract idea of creating accounts for financial transactions financial asset account and an associated wallet, over a generic computer network with generic computing elements, and generic hardware.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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, 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, 15-16 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 12175454 B1 (Kurani) in view of US 20250173729 A1 (Zhang).
As to claims 1, 15 and 20,
Kurani teaches,
acquiring a request for generating a first account for a non-fungible token (NFT)-related service from a terminal of a user (col. 45, ll. 11-12 “receive, from a client system 103, an NFT account request”), the request for generating the first account indicating another service distinguished from the NFT-related service (col. 45, ll. 15-16 “the NFT account associated with an account number and a customer identifier”, col. 40, ll. 63-65 “the received DNFT exchange object 270 can include routing numbers of the buyer and seller, account numbers of the buyer and seller”);
acquiring information about a second account corresponding to an account of the user in the another service (col. 45, ll. 15-16 “an account number and a customer identifier”, col. 40, ll. 63-65 “routing numbers of the buyer and seller, account numbers of the buyer and seller”);
generating the first account of the user for the NFT-related service based on the information about the second account (col. 45, ll. 14-16 “create the NFT account associated with an account number and a customer identifier”);
Kurani does not teach,
generating a first digital asset wallet of the user and associating information about the first digital asset wallet with the first account of the user.
however, Zhang teaches,
generating a first digital asset wallet of the user (para. 74 “creating a private blockchain account (e.g., the cold wallet illustrated in FIG. 6)”) and associating information about the first digital asset wallet with the first account of the user (para. 74 “using an off-chain transaction between a blockchain account to which an NFT in a user e-wallet belongs (e.g., the user wallet illustrated in FIG. 6) and the private blockchain account”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine creating an NFT based account of Kurani with creating a cold storage wallet of Zhang because a cold storage wallet improves an NFT based account by providing “enhance[s] the security of NFT digital assets”, see Zhang, para. 5.
Additionally, with respect to claim 1,
Kurani teaches,
A method performed in an apparatus (FIG. 1, item 102) including at least one processor and at least one memory in which instructions to be executed by the at least one processor are stored, the method being performed by the at least one processor (FIG. 1, col. 9, ll. 11-35) comprising.
Additionally, with respect to claim 17,
Kurani teaches,
An apparatus (FIG. 1, item 102) comprising:
a communication interface (FIG. 1, item 112) configured to communicate with a terminal of a user (FIG. 1, item 103, col. 9, ll. 36-56);
at least one processor (FIG. 1, item 110); and
at least one memory (FIG. 1, item 160) in which instructions to be executed by the at least one processor are stored, wherein the at least one processor is configured to, when the instructions are executed by the at least one processor (FIG. 1, col. 9, ll. 11-35).
Additionally, with respect to claim 20,
Kurani teaches,
A non-transitory computer-readable recording medium configured to store instructions (FIG. 1, item 160, col. 11, ll. 46-48 “The system memory 160 can include one or more hardware memory devices to store binary data, digital data”), when executed by at least one processor, causing the at least one processor to perform an operation, wherein the instructions are configured to cause the at least one processor (FIG. 1, col. 9, ll. 11-35) to.
As to claim 2, combination of Kurani and Zhang teach all the limtiations of claim 1.
Kurani also teaches,
transmitting information about at least one of the first account or the first digital asset wallet to the terminal of the user (FIG. 1, item 170, col. 33, ll. 47-48 “a mobile wallet system 170 associated with the NFT account”, col. 45, ll. 17-18 “install, via an application programming interface (API) on the client system 102, a digital wallet”).
As to claim 3, combination of Kurani and Zhang teach all the limtiations of claims 1 and 2.
Kurani also teaches,
causing the information about at least one of the first account or the first digital asset wallet to be displayed on the terminal of the user (FIG. 11, item 172, col. 64, ll. 54-55 “the digital DNFT exchange instrument can be provided to the mobile wallet system 170”).
As to claims 4 and 16, combination of Kurani and Zhang teach all the limitations of claims 1 and 15.
Kurani does not teach,
acquiring a wallet link request from the terminal of the user for associating a second digital asset wallet of the user with the first account; and
associating information about the second digital asset wallet with the first account of the user.
however, Zhang teaches,
acquiring a wallet link request from the terminal of the user (para. 56 “the terminal device that requests the account creation”) for associating a second digital asset wallet of the user with the first account (para. 44 “adding a blockchain account and an NFT into a user e-wallet”); and
associating information about the second digital asset wallet with the first account of the user (para. 44 “adding a blockchain account and an NFT into a user e-wallet”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine creating an NFT based account of Kurani with creating a cold storage wallet of Zhang because a cold storage wallet improves an NFT based account by providing “enhance[s] the security of NFT digital assets”, see Zhang, para. 5.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kurani in view of Zhang in further view of US 20240403081 A1 (Miller).
As to claim 5, combination of Kurani and Zhang teach all the limitations of claims 1 and 4.
Kurani does not teach,
in response to associating the information about the second digital asset wallet with the first account, causing the information about the first digital asset wallet not to be associated with the first account.
however, Zhang teaches,
in response to associating the information about the second digital asset wallet with the first account (para. 44), [causing the information about the first digital asset wallet not to be associated with the first account].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine creating an NFT based account of Kurani with creating a cold storage wallet of Zhang because a cold storage wallet improves an NFT based account by providing “enhance[s] the security of NFT digital assets”, see Zhang, para. 5.
combination of Kurani and Zhang do not teach,
[in response to …] causing the information about the first digital asset wallet not to be associated with the first account.
however, Miller teaches,
causing the information about the first digital asset wallet not to be associated with the first account (para. 523 “unlink (e.g., remove the link to and/or cancel the link to) the first account from the first external account”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine creating an NFT based account of Kurani with creating a cold storage wallet of Zhang with account association removal of Miller because account association removal improves an NFT based account to enhance management of privacy associated with linked accounts, see Miller, FIG. 23Q, para. 514.
Claims 6-14 and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kurani in view of Zhang in further view of US 20240193586 A1 (Nohara).
As to claims 6 and 17, combination of Kurani and Zhang teach all the limitations of claims 1 and 15.
combination of Kurani and Zhang do not teach,
acquiring a request for ticket purchase through a fiat currency from the terminal of the user; in response to the request for ticket purchase, determining approval of payment for a ticket through the fiat currency; and
transmitting an NFT representing the ticket to the first digital asset wallet of the user by executing a smart contract corresponding to the ticket through a blockchain network.
however, Nohara teaches,
acquiring a request for ticket purchase through a fiat currency from the terminal of the user (para. 66 “The first user 11 who wants to purchase a ticket requests a ticket purchase”); in response to the request for ticket purchase, determining approval of payment for a ticket through the fiat currency (para. 66 “the ticket purchase is authenticated”);
transmitting an NFT representing the ticket to the first digital asset wallet of the user by executing a smart contract corresponding to the ticket through a blockchain network (para. 66 “the electronic ticket system 21 transfers owner information of the NFT associated with the ticket to a wallet of the blockchain 20 owned by the first user 11”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine creating an NFT based account of Kurani with creating a cold storage wallet of Zhang with ticket purchase of Nohara because ticket purchase improves an NFT based account to enhance “convenience of the user in relation to the ticket”, see Nohara, para. 97.
As to claims 7 and 18, combination of Kurani and Zhang teach all the limitations of claims 1 and 6 and 15 and 17.
Kurani also teaches,
wherein the information about the second account includes information about a payment method of the user for the another service (col. 13, ll. 37-41 “transfer an NFT from a first account to a second account, and can be linked with a quantitative value indicating a value of the NFT. For example, the quantitative value can correspond to a value of fiat currency”), and
[wherein the determining approval of payment for the ticket includes determining approval of the payment for the ticket through] the fiat currency (col. 13, ll. 41-42) [based on the information about the second account].
combination of Kurani and Zhang do not explicitly teach,
wherein the determining approval of payment for the ticket includes determining approval of the payment for the ticket through the [fiat] currency based on the information about the second account.
however, Nohara teaches,
wherein the determining approval of payment for the ticket includes determining approval of the payment for the ticket (para. 66 “the ticket purchase is authenticated”) through the [fiat] currency based on the information about the second account (para. 68 “the second user 12 transfers the owner information of the NFT owned by the first user 11 to a wallet of the second user”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine creating an NFT based account of Kurani with creating a cold storage wallet of Zhang with ticket purchase of Nohara because ticket purchase improves an NFT based account to enhance “convenience of the user in relation to the ticket”, see Nohara, para. 97.
As to claim 8, combination of Kurani and Zhang teach all the limitations of claims 1 and 6.
Kurani also teaches,
recording, on a blockchain, information associated with payment for the ticket through the fiat currency through the blockchain network (col. 34, ll. 17-19 “updating the overlay ledger 161 to record the new ownership of the NFT being exchanged”, col. 13, ll. 37-42 “The NFT exchange system 104 can receive an instruction to transfer an NFT from a first account to a second account, and can be linked with a quantitative value indicating a value of the NFT. For example, the quantitative value can correspond to a value of fiat currency,”).
As to claim 9, combination of Kurani and Zhang teach all the limitations of claims 1 and 6.
Kurani also teaches,
[determining approval of payment for the ticket through] a fiat currency (col. 13, ll. 41-42) [of the user based on the information indicating approval of payment for the ticket acquired from the external payment server].
combination Kurian and Zhang do not teach,
wherein the determining approval of payment for the ticket includes: acquiring information indicating approval of payment for the ticket from an external payment server;
determining approval of payment for the ticket through a [fiat] currency of the user based on the information indicating approval of payment for the ticket acquired from the external payment server.
however, Nohara teaches,
wherein the determining approval of payment for the ticket includes: acquiring information indicating approval of payment for the ticket from an external payment server (para. 66, 68);
determining approval of payment for the ticket through a [fiat] currency of the user based on the information indicating approval of payment for the ticket acquired from the external payment server (para. 66, 68, para. 127 “An issuer of the ticket, the host of the event, or the external service may determine the method of transfer of a ticket”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine creating an NFT based account of Kurani with creating a cold storage wallet of Zhang with ticket purchase of Nohara because ticket purchase improves an NFT based account to enhance “convenience of the user in relation to the ticket”, see Nohara, para. 97.
As to claim 10, combination of Kurani and Zhang teach all the limitations of claim 1.
Kurani also teaches,
in case that the user corresponds to an owner of an NFT representing the ticket, providing information about the ticket to the terminal of the user (FIG. 11, item 174, col. 71, ll. 62-64 “an image or video of the asset corresponding to the NFT, a identifier”, col. 65, ll. 8-12“communicate wirelessly with at least one of the client system or the data processing system, and where the presentation element can be configured to present at least of the plurality of internal states of the DNFT exchange instrument”).
As to claim 11, combination of Kurani and Zhang teach all the limitations of claim 1.
Kurani also teaches,
wherein the generating the first account (col. 29, ll. 1-2 “generate an NFT account”) includes:
determining whether the user already owns an account for the NFT-related service (col. 28, ll. 63-64 “if an NFT account has been created”);
in response to the determination that the user does not already own an account for the NFT-related service (col. 28, ll. 66-67), generating the first account of the user for the NFT-related service (col. 29, ll. 1-2 “generate an NFT account”).
As to claim 12, combination of Kurani and Zhang teach all the limitations of claims 1 and 6.
Kurani also teaches,
wherein in response to the execution of the smart contract (col. 29, ll 10-11 “execute instructions at the smart contract”), the smart contract is configured (col. 29, ll 10-11) to issue [the NFT representing the ticket] and transfer the issued NFT to the first digital asset wallet of the user (col. 29, ll. 2-3 “record the token identifier with the newly generated NFT account”).
combination of Kurani and Zhang do not teach,
[wherein …] the NFT representing the ticket […].
however Nohara teaches,
the NFT representing the ticket (para. 44 “a non fungible token (NFT) issued on a blockchain as a ticket”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine creating an NFT based account of Kurani with creating a cold storage wallet of Zhang with ticket purchase of Nohara because ticket purchase improves an NFT based account to enhance “convenience of the user in relation to the ticket”, see Nohara, para. 97.
As to claim 13, combination of Kurani and Zhang teach all the limitations of claims 1 and 6.
Kurani also teaches,
wherein in response to the execution of the smart contract, the smart contract is configured to transfer, to the first digital asset wallet of the user, the NFT which has been issued by the smart contract before the execution of the smart contract and [represents the ticket] (col. 37, ll. 22-24 “generate a smart contract based on criteria of a transfer of an NFT or modification to one or more NFT accounts”, col. 38 “execute a transfer of contents of the container or the smart contract control structure 210 to a container linked with a wallet key”).
combination of Kurani and Zhang do not teach,
[wherein …] represents the ticket.
however Nohara teaches,
represents the ticket (para. 44 “a non fungible token (NFT) issued on a blockchain as a ticket”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine creating an NFT based account of Kurani with creating a cold storage wallet of Zhang with ticket purchase of Nohara because ticket purchase improves an NFT based account to enhance “convenience of the user in relation to the ticket”, see Nohara, para. 97.
As to claims 14 and 19, combination of Kurani and Zhang teach all the limitations of claims 1 and 6 and 15 and 17.
Kurani also teaches,
based on at least one of a transferor, a transferee, or [the NFT representing the ticket], determine whether the transferor permits transfer of [the NFT representing the ticket] from a digital asset wallet of the transferor to a digital asset wallet of the transferee (FIG. 8, item 810, col. 57, ll. 3-5 “receive, from a client system, an exchange request for a NFT of an NFT account”); and
in response to the determination that the transfer is permitted (col. 57, ll. 3-5), transfer [the NFT representing the ticket] from the digital asset wallet of the transferor to the digital asset wallet of the transferee (FIG. 8, item 830, 832, col. 60, ll. 22-25 “the one or more processors can sign and transmit, using the internal private key via the exchange interface, the NFT to a wallet public address of the client system”).
combination of Kurani and Zhang do not teach,
[based …, determine …] the NFT representing the ticket […],
[in response to … transfer] the NFT representing the ticket […].
however, Nohara teaches,
[based …, determine …] the NFT representing the ticket (para. 44) […],
[in response to … transfer] the NFT representing the ticket (para. 44) […].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine creating an NFT based account of Kurani with creating a cold storage wallet of Zhang with ticket purchase of Nohara because ticket purchase improves an NFT based account to enhance “convenience of the user in relation to the ticket”, see Nohara, para. 97.
Conclusion
References made of record, not relied upon, pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure, include:
US 20230104071 A1 (Ahmed) disclosing rapid delivery of broadcasted live content,
US 20230360029 A1 (Pranger) disclosing non-fungible tokens for stadium seats and tickets,
US 20230230075 A1 (Ailello) disclosing longitudinal system using non-fungible tokens that evolve over time,
US 20230281584 A1 (Weinshanker) disclosing product purchases and non-fungible tokens, and
US 20240386415 A1 (Haruna) disclosing non-fungible token generation system and non-fungible token generation method.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BROCK E TURK whose telephone number is (571)272-5626. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-5PM EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ryan Donlon can be reached at 571-270-3602. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BROCK E TURK/Examiner, Art Unit 3692 /DAVID P SHARVIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3692