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 .
Election/Restrictions Acknowledgement
The applicant’s election without traverse of Group II: (Claims 8-15 and 17-20) is the communication received on 12/08/2025 is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 01/31/2025 is being considered by the examiner.
Status of the Claims
This is a non-final rejection prepared in response to U.S. Patent Application 18/982,788 filed on
12/16/2024.
Claims 1-7 and 16 are cancelled.
Claims 8-15 and 17-20 are pending.
Claim Objections
Claim 8, 11-12, 15 and 21 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 8, the recited “physical assets” on line 4 of the claim should be amended to “the physical assets” as “physical assets” was previously recited on line 1 of the claim.
Claim 11, the recited “non-fungible tokens” on line 2 of the claim should be amended to “the non-fungible tokens” as “non-fungible tokens” was previously recited on the parent claim.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "the owners" on line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the group" on line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 15 should be amended in independent form to avoid any confusions that may arise due to statutory class differences in claim 8.
Claim 21, the recited “…includes details associated with ownership of the physical assets the are indicated of emotion and/or heredity associated with the physical assets” should be amended as it contains grammatical errors which make the claim difficult to read and understand.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are:
“an asset register…”, “the asset register retains control of non-fungible tokens…”, “a digital marketplace for facilitating transactions of the non-fungible tokens registered on the asset register…” and “the register adjusts beneficial ownership of the one or more non-fungible tokens tied to the physical assets…” in claim 8.
“the system corrects the beneficial ownership of the non-fungible tokens…” in claim 10.
“the register releases non-fungible tokens to wallets of the owners or wallets of designated individuals thereof if the register ceases to exist” in claims 11 and 17.
“the asset register to allow for trading thereof on a digital marketplace…” in claim 15.
Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitations to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitations recite sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 8-15 and 17-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 8, limitations “an asset register…”, “the asset register retains control of non-fungible tokens…”, “a digital marketplace for facilitating transactions of the non-fungible tokens registered on the asset register…” and “the register adjusts beneficial ownership of the one or more non-fungible tokens tied to the physical assets…” invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. Here the claims and specifications are silent with respect to any structure corresponding to the generic placeholder. Therefore the claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) for lacking adequate written description.
Regarding claim 10, limitation “the system corrects the beneficial ownership of the non-fungible tokens…” invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. Here the claims and specifications are silent with respect to any structure corresponding to the generic placeholder. Therefore the claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) for lacking adequate written description.
Regarding claims 11 and 17, limitation “the register releases non-fungible tokens to wallets of the owners or wallets of designated individuals thereof if the register ceases to exist” invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. Here the claims and specifications are silent with respect to any structure corresponding to the generic placeholder. Therefore the claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) for lacking adequate written description.
Regarding claim 15, limitations “the asset register to allow for trading thereof on a digital marketplace…” invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. Here the claims and specifications are silent with respect to any structure corresponding to the generic placeholder. Therefore the claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) for lacking adequate written description.
Claims 9, 12-14 and 18-21 are also rejected upon rejected parent independent claim 8.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 8-15 and 17-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 8, limitations “an asset register…”, “the asset register retains control of non-fungible tokens…”, “a digital marketplace for facilitating transactions of the non-fungible tokens registered on the asset register…” and “the register adjusts beneficial ownership of the one or more non-fungible tokens tied to the physical assets…” invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The specification fails to disclose sufficient corresponding structure for these limitations. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Regarding claim 10, limitation “the system corrects the beneficial ownership of the non-fungible tokens…” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The specification fails to disclose sufficient corresponding structure for these limitations. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Regarding claims 11 and 17, limitations “the register releases non-fungible tokens to wallets of the owners or wallets of designated individuals thereof if the register ceases to exist” invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The specification fails to disclose sufficient corresponding structure for these limitations. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Regarding claim 15, limitation “the asset register to allow for trading thereof on a digital marketplace…” invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The specification fails to disclose sufficient corresponding structure for these limitations. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claim 9 recites “once a transaction has taken place it registers to a wallet or account associated with a transferee…” It is unclear what the claim refers to by “it”, as it could refer to the non-fungible token, the transaction, or a registry entry. Further the claim recites “promoting the physical assets digitally via the non-fungible tokens…” which is indefinite as the claim does not explain what constitutes direct versus indirect interaction. Therefore the scope of the claim is unclear and one in the ordinary skill in the art would not be able to determine it with reasonable certainty.
Claims 10-15 and 17-21 are also rejected upon rejected parent independent claim 8.
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 8-15 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1: Claims 8-15 and 17-20 are directed to a system (i.e., machine, and manufacture). Therefore, these claims fall within the four statutory categories of invention, and thus must be further analyzed at Step 2A to determine if the claims are directed to a judicial exception (See MPEP 2106.03, subsection II).
Step 2A Prong One: Claim 8, recites (i.e., sets forth or describes) an abstract idea. More specifically, the following bolded claim elements recite abstract ideas while the non-bolded claim elements recite additional elements according to MPEP 2106.04(a).
A system for managing physical assets tied to non-fungible tokens comprising:
an asset register, wherein the asset register retains control of non-fungible tokens in the asset register that is associated with physical assets tied to one or more non-fungible tokens and allowing transactions related to the one or more non-fungible tokens to occur; and
a digital marketplace for facilitating transactions of the non-fungible tokens registered on the asset register, wherein the digital marketplace is linked to the asset register via at least one of an application programming interface, a certificate of authenticity of the one or more non-fungible tokens, metadata associated with the one or more non-fungible tokens and the one or more non-fungible tokens itself, wherein the register adjusts beneficial ownership of the one or more non-fungible tokens tied to the physical assets.
Claim 8, recites (i.e., sets forth or describes) a system for managing physical assets linked to tokens. The claim achieves this by having an asset register that stores asset information for assets linked to a token and a marketplace that facilitates transactions related to the tokens. Specifically, but for the additional elements, the claim under its broadest reasonable interpretation recites limitations grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas (i.e., fundamental economic practices).
Step 2A Prong Two: Because the claim recites abstract ideas, the analysis proceeds to
determine whether the claim recites additional elements that recite a practical application of the
abstract ideas. Here, the additional element of a digital marketplace, an asset register, an application programming interface and non-fungible tokens merely serve as tools to perform the abstract idea (MPEP § 2106.05(f)). Therefore, the claim as a whole fail to recite a practical application of the abstract ideas.
Step 2B: Determines whether the claim as a whole amount to significantly more than the exception itself. Evaluating additional elements to determine whether they amount to an inventive concept requires considering them both individually and in combination to ensure that they amount to significantly more than the judicial exception itself. Here, the additional elements, taken individually and in combination, do not result in the claim as a whole, amounting to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed previously with respect to Step 2A, the additional elements merely serve as a tool to perform an abstract idea. Thus, there is no inventive concept in the claim and thus the claim is not eligible, warranting a rejection for lack of subject matter eligibility and concluding the eligibility analysis. Further, the additional element “digital” and “non-fungible” generally links the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment (MPEP § 2106.05(h)).
Dependent Claims: Claims 9-15 and 17-21 have also been analyzed for subject matter
eligibility. However, claims 9-15 and 17-21 also fail to recite patent eligible subject matter for the
following reasons:
Claim 9 recites the following bolded claim elements as abstract ideas while the non-bolded claim elements recite additional elements according to MPEP 2106.04(a).
the non-fungible token associated with the physical assets is held in a wallet or account associated with a holder that is linked to the marketplace and the asset register, and wherein once a transaction has taken place it registers to a wallet or account associated with a transferee to allow for at least one of owning, cataloging, authenticating, inventorying, managing, and promoting the physical assets digitally via the non-fungible tokens in the wallet or account of the holder or the transferee, and for aggregation of data concerning user preferences in relation to assets held in the wallet or account associated with the holder or transferee.
The claim further recites an abstract idea. In other words, it recites limitations grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Further, the non-bolded additional element “non-fungible” generally links the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment (MPEP § 2106.05(h)). Further, the additional elements, taken individually and in combination, do not result in the claim as a whole, amounting to significantly more than the judicial exception. Thus, there is no inventive concept in the claim and thus the claim is not eligible, warranting a rejection for lack of subject matter eligibility and concluding the eligibility analysis.
Claim 10 recites the following bolded claim elements as abstract ideas while the non-bolded claim elements recite additional elements according to MPEP 2106.04(a).
the system corrects the beneficial ownership of the non-fungible tokens and the physical assets that are associated therewith if the physical assets are held by another person or were entered into the asset register by a person who is not the owner thereof.
The claim further recites an abstract idea. In other words, it recites limitations grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The non-bolded additional elements of the system fails to recite a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea because it merely serves as a tool to perform the abstract idea (MPEP §2106.05(f)). Further, the additional element “non-fungible” generally links the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment (MPEP § 2106.05(h)). Further, the additional elements, taken individually and in combination, do not result in the claim as a whole, amounting to significantly more than the judicial exception. Thus, there is no inventive concept in the claim and thus the claim is not eligible, warranting a rejection for lack of subject matter eligibility and concluding the eligibility analysis.
Claims 11 and 17 recite the following bolded claim elements as abstract ideas while the non-bolded claim elements recite additional elements according to MPEP 2106.04(a).
the register releases non-fungible tokens to wallets of the owners or wallets of designated individuals thereof if the register ceases to exist.
The non-bolded additional element “non-fungible” generally links the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment (MPEP § 2106.05(h)). Further, the additional elements, taken individually and in combination, do not result in the claim as a whole, amounting to significantly more than the judicial exception. Thus, there is no inventive concept in the claim and thus the claim is not eligible, warranting a rejection for lack of subject matter eligibility and concluding the eligibility analysis.
Claim 12 recites the following bolded claim elements as abstract ideas while the non-bolded claim elements recite additional elements according to MPEP 2106.04(a).
the certificate of authenticity comprises information selected from the group consisting of physical asset care instructions; physical asset condition and wear; physical asset creation date; physical asset digital representation; physical asset dimensions and weight; physical asset identification number or serial number; physical asset maintenance and restoration history; physical asset manufacturing process or techniques; physical asset material composition; physical asset ownership transfer mechanism; physical asset packaging and preservation details; physical asset photographer or documenter; physical asset protection status such as insurance cover; physical asset registration status with relevant authorities; physical asset repair records; physical asset type and category; blockchain transaction record; creator or manufacturer's contact information; creator's digital signature; creator's name and biographical details; delivery or transportation method; digital twin of the physical asset; geolocation details during transport or display; location of the physical asset, intellectual property rights; certificate of authenticity; manufacturer's guarantee or warranty details; marketplace information; metadata describing digital records linked to the physical asset; ownership change history; ownership verification method; physical storage location and security details of the physical asset; provenance of the physical asset; quick response code (QR code) or radio frequency identifications (RFID) tag, or other identifier linked to the non-fungible token; related contractual agreements; restoration or conservation details of the physical asset; smart contract terms governing the non-fungible token; supply chain and logistics details; transaction timestamps for previous ownership; verification of originality or authenticity; and a combination thereof, wherein
the information can be accessed via a linked universal resource locator (URL) from the marketplace or by physical interaction with the physical asset using at least one of a near field communication, image recognition, QR-codes and other identifiers that allow verification of asset information and authenticity with reference to the non-fungible token as registered on the asset register.
The claim further recites an abstract idea. In other words, it recites limitations grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The non-bolded additional elements of a marketplace, a near field communication, image recognition, QR-codes, and a linked universal resource locator (URL) fail to recite a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea because they merely serves as a tool to perform the abstract idea (MPEP §2106.05(f)). Further, the additional element “non-fungible” generally links the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment (MPEP § 2106.05(h)). Furthermore, the additional elements, taken individually and in combination, do not result in the claim as a whole, amounting to significantly more than the judicial exception. Thus, there is no inventive concept in the claim and thus the claim is not eligible, warranting a rejection for lack of subject matter eligibility and concluding the eligibility analysis.
Claims 13, 18 and 19 recite the following bolded claim elements as abstract ideas while the non-bolded claim elements recite additional elements according to MPEP 2106.04(a).
at least one of augmented reality experiences and other Rich Content are embedded in a URL associated with, and referenced in the non-fungible token to provide at least one of multi-media experiences, learning and promotional opportunities regarding the physical asset, and wherein the augmented reality experiences may be triggered by a predetermined value in information stored as part of the certificate of authenticity of the non-fungible token, and wherein the augmented reality experiences and other Rich Content are transferable with the non-fungible token.
The claim further recites an abstract idea. In other words, it recites limitations grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The non-bolded additional element “non-fungible” generally links the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment (MPEP § 2106.05(h)). Further, the additional elements, taken individually and in combination, do not result in the claim as a whole, amounting to significantly more than the judicial exception. Thus, there is no inventive concept in the claim and thus the claim is not eligible, warranting a rejection for lack of subject matter eligibility and concluding the eligibility analysis.
Claim 14 recites the following bolded claim elements as abstract ideas while the non-bolded claim elements recite additional elements according to MPEP 2106.04(a).
holding of physical assets via non-fungible tokens is configured for aggregation of data, statistics or trends concerning user preferences or choices in relation to assets held in the user account or wallet, and commercialization thereof.
The claim further recites an abstract idea. In other words, it recites limitations grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The non-bolded additional element “non-fungible” generally links the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment (MPEP § 2106.05(h)). Further, the additional elements, taken individually and in combination, do not result in the claim as a whole, amounting to significantly more than the judicial exception. Thus, there is no inventive concept in the claim and thus the claim is not eligible, warranting a rejection for lack of subject matter eligibility and concluding the eligibility analysis.
Claim 15 recites the following bolded claim elements as abstract ideas while the non-bolded claim elements recite additional elements according to MPEP 2106.04(a).
A method of using the system of claim 8, comprising registering physical assets in the asset register to allow for trading thereof on a digital marketplace, and wherein the digital marketplace is a non-fungible token marketplace recorded on an immutable blockchain ledger.
The claim further recites an abstract idea. In other words, it recites limitations grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The non-bolded additional elements of the system fails to recite a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea because it merely serves as a tool to perform the abstract idea (MPEP §2106.05(f)). Further, the additional element “non-fungible” and “digital” generally links the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment (MPEP § 2106.05(h)). Further, the additional elements, taken individually and in combination, do not result in the claim as a whole, amounting to significantly more than the judicial exception. Thus, there is no inventive concept in the claim and thus the claim is not eligible, warranting a rejection for lack of subject matter eligibility and concluding the eligibility analysis.
Claim 20 recites the following bolded claim elements as abstract ideas while the non-bolded claim elements recite additional elements according to MPEP 2106.04(a).
the non-fungible token represents a right to call for delivery of the physical asset.
The non-bolded additional element of “non-fungible” generally links the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment (MPEP § 2106.05(h)). Further, the additional elements, taken individually and in combination, do not result in the claim as a whole, amounting to significantly more than the judicial exception. Thus, there is no inventive concept in the claim and thus the claim is not eligible, warranting a rejection for lack of subject matter eligibility and concluding the eligibility analysis.
Claim 21 recites the following bolded claim elements as abstract ideas while the non-bolded claim elements recite additional elements according to MPEP 2106.04(a).
the metadata associated with the one or more non-fungible tokens includes details associated with ownership of the physical assets the are indicated of emotion and/or heredity associated with the physical assets.
The claim further recites an abstract idea. In other words, it recites limitations grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The non-bolded additional element “non-fungible” generally links the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment (MPEP § 2106.05(h)). Further, the additional elements, taken individually and in combination, do not result in the claim as a whole, amounting to significantly more than the judicial exception. Thus, there is no inventive concept in the claim and thus the claim is not eligible, warranting a rejection for lack of subject matter eligibility and concluding the eligibility analysis.
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 8, 10, 12 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fleming (WO 2023/039180 A2) in view of Lipton (US 11,783,011 B1).
Regarding claim 8, Fleming discloses:
an asset register, wherein (¶0026, The architecture 100 includes an asset registry system 104 associated with an asset registry that is remote from, but in communication with, the client-side electronic devices. See Fig. 1A)
the asset register retains control of non-fungible tokens in the asset register that is associated with physical assets tied to one or more non-fungible tokens and allowing transactions related to the one or more non-fungible tokens to occur; and (¶0075, Once the NFT that is associated with the artifact has been minted, the owner of the artifact and/or copyright (e.g., the entity associated with the user electronic device) may provide identifying information associated with the NFT, such has a block value and/or a hash value, to the registry system such that the registry system may store the identifying information associated with the NFT that is associated with the artifact. ¶0033, The distributed-ledger system 106 may send the cryptographic certificate of ownership value, the time value, and/or other information (such as a block number, for example) to the registry system 104 and/or the electronic device 102.)
a digital marketplace for facilitating transactions of the non-fungible tokens registered on the asset register, wherein (¶0026, The architecture 100 also has a third-party marketplace system 124 that is remote from, but in communication with, the client-side devices 102 and the registry system 104. The third-party marketplace system 124 may be used to perform transactions involving artifacts, copyrights associated with artifacts, and/or certificate of ownerships associated with copyrights. In some cases, the third-party marketplace 124 may desire to verify a copyright and/or a certificate of ownership associated with a copyright that is involved in a transaction via the registry system 104.)
the digital marketplace is linked to the asset register via at least one of an application programming interface, a certificate of authenticity of the one or more non-fungible tokens, metadata associated with the one or more non-fungible tokens metadata and the one or more non-fungible tokens itself, wherein (¶0050, The API component 164 may be configured to enable users of the third-party marketplace system 124 to interact with services provided by the registry system 104. For example, a purchasing entity accessing the marketplace component 162 to purchase an item, such as, an NFT associated with a copyrighted item, an NFT associated with a certificate of ownership of a copyrighted item, a copyrighted item, and/or a certificate of ownership associated with a copyrighted item, may desire to authenticate the item to be purchased, obtain insurance on the item, and/or request an insurance claim on the item The third-party marketplace system 124 may present the API component 164 such that the purchasing entity may interact with the registry system 104 in order to verify, insure, and/or issue an insurance claim on the item.
Fleming does not disclose, however Lipton teaches:
the register adjusts beneficial ownership of the one or more non-fungible tokens tied to the physical assets. (Col 3 lines 52-58, In some examples, when an NFT representing a hybrid asset is traded, sold, or otherwise transferred on the blockchain from a first entity to a second entity ( e.g., from one person to another), the hybrid asset management platform updates the ownership information in the corresponding certificate of legal ownership associated with the hybrid asset. Col 4 lines 56-64, When an NFT representing a physical asset managed by the hybrid asset trading platform 100 changes ownership on the blockchain, then the hybrid asset trading platform 100 can ensure that a matching asset certificate of ownership in a private database of the hybrid asset trading platform 100 is also updated. Similarly, when the physical asset changes ownership in the real-world, then the hybrid asset trading platform 100 can ensure that the matching asset certificate and asset NFT are also updated to reflect this change.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date
of the claimed invention to have modify the invention of Fleming with Lipton’s teaching. One of ordinary skills in the art would have been motivated in order to update the ownership of the asset to the new owner without the need of moving the physical asset from its vault/location.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Fleming and Lipton further teaches:
the system corrects the beneficial ownership of the non-fungible tokens and the physical assets that are associated therewith if the physical assets are held by another person or were entered into the asset register by a person who is not the owner thereof. (col 4 lines 56-64, When an NFT representing a physical asset managed by the hybrid asset trading platform 100 changes ownership on the blockchain, then the hybrid asset trading platform 100 can ensure that a matching asset certificate of ownership in a private database of the hybrid asset trading platform 100 is also updated. Similarly, when the physical asset changes ownership in the real-world, then the hybrid asset trading platform 100 can ensure that the matching asset certificate and asset NFT are also updated to reflect this change. Col 9 lines 18-26, In some examples, an asset NFT monitoring service 218 performs ongoing or periodic monitoring of records on a decentralized ledger 122 to detect changes to NFTs ( e.g., NFT 224) issued and managed by the hybrid asset management system 104. In some examples, upon detecting an update to an NFT managed by the hybrid asset management system 104, the asset NFT monitoring service 218 records data reflecting the update as asset NFT status data 204, which can be stored in a database or other type of data store. Col 14 lines 48-59, When a change of ownership to an asset NFT has occurred on the decentralized ledger 122 (e.g., based on a successful transaction performed by the asset NFT transaction service 222), in some examples, an asset NFT monitoring service 218 can generate data reflecting a change to the corresponding NFT and store the data in the asset NFT status data 204. In some examples, the update to the data in the asset NFT status data causes the asset certificate issuance and revocation service 206 to revoke the existing asset NFT and issue a new asset NFT with the identity of the new owner. Col 16 lines 28-32, As shown, at some point later in time, additional metadata 508 may be obtained and stored on the decentralized ledger 122 reflecting any update to a physical status of a corresponding physical item ( e.g., as a result of transferring ownership of the hybrid asset). Col 21 lines 1-3, In some examples, the operations further include storing, at the decentralized ledger, updated status metadata, wherein the updated status metadata includes information reflecting the transfer of ownership from the first owner to the second owner.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date
of the claimed invention to have modify the combination of Fleming and Lipton with Lipton’s additional teaching. One of ordinary skills in the art would have been motivated in order to update the ownership of the asset to the new owner without the need of moving the physical asset from its vault/location.
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Fleming and Lipton further discloses:
the certificate of authenticity comprises information selected from the group consisting of physical asset care instructions; physical asset condition and wear; physical asset creation date; physical asset digital representation; physical asset dimensions and weight; physical asset identification number or serial number; physical asset maintenance and restoration history; physical asset manufacturing process or techniques; physical asset material composition; physical asset ownership transfer mechanism; physical asset packaging and preservation details; physical asset photographer or documenter; physical asset protection status such as insurance cover; physical asset registration status with relevant authorities; physical asset repair records; physical asset type and category; blockchain transaction record; creator or manufacturer's contact information; creator's digital signature; creator's name and biographical details; delivery or transportation method; digital twin of the physical asset; geolocation details during transport or display; location of the physical asset, intellectual property rights; certificate of authenticity; manufacturer's guarantee or warranty details; marketplace information; metadata describing digital records linked to the physical asset; ownership change history; ownership verification method; physical storage location and security details of the physical asset; provenance of the physical asset; quick response code (QR code) or radio frequency identifications (RFID) tag, or other identifier linked to the non-fungible token; related contractual agreements; restoration or conservation details of the physical asset; smart contract terms governing the non-fungible token; supply chain and logistics details; transaction timestamps for previous ownership; verification of originality or authenticity; and a combination thereof, wherein (Fleming ¶0065, In some cases, the certificate of ownership may include identifying information associated with the artifact, identifying information associated the entity who created the artifact, identifying information associated an owner of the copyright, smart contract information (e.g., terms associated with purchasing the certificate of ownership), etc.
the information can be accessed via a linked universal resource locator (URL) from the marketplace or by physical interaction with the physical asset using at least one of a near field communication, image recognition, QR-codes and other identifiers that allow verification of asset information and authenticity with reference to the non-fungible token as registered on the asset register. (¶0110, In some cases, the confirmation data includes a uniform resource locator (URL) associated with at least one of the copyright, the artifact, and/or the certificate of ownership. In some examples, the entity associated with the electronic device may use the URL to identify the copyright, the artifact, and/or certificate of ownership when accessing the registry system. ¶0140, Additionally, and/or alternatively, in some examples the process 800 may include generating the first certificate of ownership associated with the copyright includes generating a uniform resource locator (URL) associated with at least one of the copyright or the first certificate of ownership and storing the URL in the repository. See claim 10.)
Furthermore, the claimed limitation “… comprises information selected from the group…” is non-functional material that does not move to distinguish over prior art. The reference is provided for the purpose of compact prosecution.
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Fleming and Lipton further discloses:
A method of using the system of claim 8, comprising registering physical assets in the asset register to allow for trading thereof on a digital marketplace, and wherein (Fleming ¶0016, The client-side device and/or system may send, to a registry system, the input data and, in examples, request data indicating a request to register, in association with an asset registry, a certificate of ownership associated with the copyright and/or the artifact. The registry system may receive the input data and/or the request data and may initiate a process of generating a certificate of ownership associated with the copyright and/or the artifact and registering the certificate of ownership in association with the asset registry. ¶0017, The registry system may generate a record in the asset registry.
the digital marketplace is a non-fungible token marketplace recorded on an immutable blockchain ledger. (¶0013, In some cases, a third-party marketplace place may offer for sale non-fungible tokens (NFTs) associated with an item (e.g., artifact) and a purchaser and/or seller of the NFT may desire to verify an authentication of the NFT prior to execution of the transaction. ¶0092, In some cases, the document may be an NFT for sale by a third-party marketplace system that is associated with a certificate of ownership associated with a copyright and/or a copyright. ¶0136, Additionally, and/or alternatively, in some examples the process 800 may include the third-party comprising an NFT marketplace. See claim 6. )
Further, the claimed limitation “to…” in “…asset register to allow for trading …” consists of language disclosing an intended use, so it is considered but given no patentable weight. (see MPEP 2111.05, MPEP 2114 and authorities cited therein). The reference is provided for the purpose of compact prosecution.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fleming and Lipton as applied to claim 8 above, in further view of Washburn (US 2025/0139611 A1).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Fleming and Lipton do not disclose, however Washburn discloses:
the non-fungible token associated with the physical assets is held in a wallet or account associated with a holder that is linked to the marketplace and the asset register, and wherein (¶0391, receiving at a registry, an identification of specific data or information a person or entity wants to make available to a third-party; ¶0392, creating a custodian wallet associated with the person or entity; ¶0397, adding the minted token to the custodian wallet associated with the person or entity;)
once a transaction has taken place it registers to a wallet or account associated with a transferee to allow for at least one of owning, cataloging, authenticating, inventorying, managing, and promoting the physical assets digitally via the non-fungible tokens in the wallet or account of the holder or the transferee, and for aggregation of data concerning user preferences in relation to assets held in the wallet or account associated with the holder or transferee. (¶0400, providing the token for the verified data or information to the website by the registry and directing the person or entity back to the website to continue their interaction with the website if the person or entity approves sharing of the data or information.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date
of the claimed invention to have modify the combination of Fleming and Lipton with Washburn’s teaching. One of ordinary skills in the art would have been motivated in order to enable direct authentication and management of the physical asset via the NFT as well as supporting inventory tracking and targeted promotions.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fleming, Lipton and Washburn as applied to claim 9 above, in further view of Pearlman (US 20100223184 A1).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Fleming, Lipton, and Washman do not disclose, however Pearlman teaches:
the register releases non-fungible tokens to wallets of the owners or wallets of designated individuals thereof if the register ceases to exist. (¶0120, In one example, when the sponsored account 1500, 1590 is closed all funds remaining in the account 1500, 1590 are transferred back to the primary account 1400. ¶0124, If a sponsor closes the primary account 1400, then all sponsored accounts 1500, 1590 held within the primary account 1400 are automatically closed at the same time and all funds in the sponsored account(s) 1500, 1590 are returned to the primary account balance 1430. The primary account balance 1430 is distributed to the sponsor, for example, by a check.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date
of the claimed invention to have modify the combination of Fleming, Lipton and Washburn with Pearlman’s teaching. One of ordinary skills in the art would have been motivated in order to ensure continuity of ownership and prevent assets from being lost.
Claims 13-14, 19 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fleming and Lipton as applied to claim 8 above, in further view of Kapur (US 2023/0070586 A1).
Regarding claim 13 and 19, the combination of Fleming and Lipton do not disclose, however Kapur discloses:
at least one of augmented reality experiences and other Rich Content are embedded in a URL associated with, and referenced in the non-fungible token to provide at least one of multi-media experiences, learning and promotional opportunities regarding the physical asset, and wherein the augmented reality experiences may be triggered by a predetermined value in information stored as part of the certificate of authenticity of the non-fungible token, and wherein the augmented reality experiences and other Rich Content are transferable with the non-fungible token. (¶0218, In storing rich media using blockchain, several components may be utilized by an entity (“miner”) adding transactions to said blockchain. References, such as URLs, may be stored in the blockchain to identify assets. Multiple URLs may also be stored when the asset is separated into pieces. An alternative or complementary option may be the use of APIs to return either the asset or a URL for the asset. In accordance with many embodiments of the invention, references can be stored by adding a ledger entry incorporating the reference enabling the entry to be timestamped. In doing so, the URL, which typically accounts for domain names, can be resolved to IP addresses. ¶0219, An NFT 510 in accordance with several embodiments of the invention may include many values including generalized data 511 (e.g. URLs), and pointers such as pointer A 512, pointer B 513, pointer C 514, and pointer D 515. In accordance with many embodiments of the invention, the generalized data 511 may be used to access corresponding rich media through the NFT 510. The NFT 510 may additionally have associated metadata 516. ¶0333, As illustrated in FIG. 22, an NFT 2200 can include several elements including a digital policy 2201 that can describe allowable use and/or any restrictions on the NFT, including on a content asset 2210 (e.g., artwork, media, video, rich media, among other types of NFT content) of the NFT. An NFT can include a policy 2201 that includes different triggering events (e.g., event A 2202, event B 2203, event C 2204) and each triggering event can be associated with a link (e.g., pointer) that provides a location to a particular layer (e.g., Layer A 2212, Layer B 2213, Layer C 2214... upto Layer N) of a content asset 2210 to which a particular triggering event corresponds.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date
of the claimed invention to have modify the combination of Fleming and Lipton with Kapur’s teaching. One of ordinary skills in the art would have been motivated in order to add value to both the NFT and the physical asset and ensure the experience remains tied to the asset.
Furthermore, the above claimed limitation is non-functional material that does not move to distinguish over prior art. The reference is provided for the purpose of compact prosecution.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Fleming and Lipton do not disclose, however Kapur teaches:
holding of physical assets via non-fungible tokens is configured for aggregation of data, statistics or trends concerning user preferences or choices in relation to assets held in the user account or wallet, and commercialization thereof. (¶0449, In many embodiments of the NFT evolution platforms, a portioned processing architecture can provide increased capabilities of protection information related to characteristics of triggering events and can provide a receiving entity (e.g., a registry), with information that may have commercial value. For example, signals conveyed to the registry may include usage statistics for the wallet, an inventory of NFTs stored in the wallet, user preferences, and/or user actions such as having achieved a new high score in a game. Signals conveyed to a registry may include outputs of artificial intelligence and/or machine learning analysis that can be performed locally in a wallet (e.g., a user identity prediction, a prediction regarding a user action with respect to an NFT in the user’s wallet, among various other types of information with commercial value). In many embodiments, to protect user data, a proxy can be used to collect information, anonymize it, and transmit it to a registry. A user may select what proxy to use, and different proxies can compete based on features, prices and protections.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date
of the claimed invention to have modify the combination of Fleming and Lipton with Kapur’s teaching. One of ordinary skills in the art would have been motivated in order to track user preferences, maintain information of inventory, support commercialization and enable data driven decisions while maintaining a direct link between digital and physical ownership.
Further, the claimed limitation “for…” in “holding of physical assets via non-fungible tokens is configured for aggregation of data…” consists of language disclosing an intended use, so it is considered but given no patentable weight. (see MPEP 2111.05, MPEP 2114 and authorities cited therein). The reference is provided for the purpose of compact prosecution.
Regarding claim 21, the combination of Fleming and Lipton do not disclose, however Kapur teaches:
the metadata associated with the one or more non-fungible tokens includes details associated with ownership of the physical assets the are indicated of emotion and/or heredity associated with the physical assets. (¶0185, The metadata associated with an NFT may also include digital media assets such as (but not limited to) images, videos about the specific NFT, and the context in which it was created (studio, film, band, company song etc.). ¶0219, The NFT 510 may additionally have associated metadata 516.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date
of the claimed invention to have modify the combination of Fleming and Lipton with Kapur’s teaching. One of ordinary skills in the art would have been motivated in order to track who owns or historically owned the asset, recognize designated beneficiaries or sentimental value of the asset.
Furthermore, the claimed limitation “…associated with the one or more non-fungible tokens includes details associated with ownership of the physical assets the are indicated of emotion and/or heredity associated with the physical assets” is non-functional material that does not move to distinguish over prior art.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fleming and Lipton as applied to claim 10 above, in further view of Pearlman (US 20100223184 A1).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Fleming and Lipton do not disclose, however Pearlman teaches:
the register releases non-fungible tokens to wallets of the owners or wallets of designated individuals thereof if the register ceases to exist. (¶0120, In one example, when the sponsored account 1500, 1590 is closed all funds remaining in the account 1500, 1590 are transferred back to the primary account 1400. ¶0124, If a sponsor closes the primary account 1400, then all sponsored accounts 1500, 1590 held within the primary account 1400 are automatically closed at the same time and all funds in the sponsored account(s) 1500, 1590 are returned to the primary account balance 1430. The primary account balance 1430 is distributed to the sponsor, for example, by a check.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date
of the claimed invention to have modify the combination of Fleming and Lipton with Pearlman’s teaching. One of ordinary skills in the art would have been motivated in order to ensure continuity of ownership and prevent assets from being lost.
Claims 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fleming, Lipton and Washburn as applied to claim 9 above, in further view of Kapur (US 2023/0070586 A1).
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Fleming, Lipton and Washburn do not disclose, however Kapur discloses:
at least one of augmented reality experiences and other Rich Content are embedded in a URL associated with, and referenced in the non-fungible token to provide at least one of multi-media experiences, learning and promotional opportunities regarding the physical asset, and wherein the augmented reality experiences may be triggered by a predetermined value in information stored as part of the certificate of authenticity of the non-fungible token, and wherein the augmented reality experiences and other Rich Content are transferable with the non-fungible token. (¶0218, In storing rich media using blockchain, several components may be utilized by an entity (“miner”) adding transactions to said blockchain. References, such as URLs, may be stored in the blockchain to identify assets. Multiple URLs may also be stored when the asset is separated into pieces. An alternative or complementary option may be the use of APIs to return either the asset or a URL for the asset. In accordance with many embodiments of the invention, references can be stored by adding a ledger entry incorporating the reference enabling the entry to be timestamped. In doing so, the URL, which typically accounts for domain names, can be resolved to IP addresses. ¶0219, An NFT 510 in accordance with several embodiments of the invention may include many values including generalized data 511 (e.g. URLs), and pointers such as pointer A 512, pointer B 513, pointer C 514, and pointer D 515. In accordance with many embodiments of the invention, the generalized data 511 may be used to access corresponding rich media through the NFT 510. The NFT 510 may additionally have associated metadata 516. ¶0333, As illustrated in FIG. 22, an NFT 2200 can include several elements including a digital policy 2201 that can describe allowable use and/or any restrictions on the NFT, including on a content asset 2210 (e.g., artwork, media, video, rich media, among other types of NFT content) of the NFT. An NFT can include a policy 2201 that includes different triggering events (e.g., event A 2202, event B 2203, event C 2204) and each triggering event can be associated with a link (e.g., pointer) that provides a location to a particular layer (e.g., Layer A 2212, Layer B 2213, Layer C 2214... upto Layer N) of a content asset 2210 to which a particular triggering event corresponds.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date
of the claimed invention to have modify the combination of Fleming, Lipton and Washburn with Kapur’s teaching. One of ordinary skills in the art would have been motivated in order to add value to both the NFT and the physical asset and ensure the experience remains tied to the asset.
Furthermore, the above claimed limitation is non-functional material that does not move to distinguish over prior art. The reference is provided for the purpose of compact prosecution.
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Fleming, Lipton and Washburn do not disclose, however Kapur discloses:
the non-fungible token represents a right to call for delivery of the physical asset. (¶0003, A current holder of an NFT is typically provided asset usage rights for the underlying NFT asset. ¶0275, In some embodiments, a certifying third party may generate an NFT associated with certain rights upon the occurrence of a specific event. ¶0310, Under an earlier example, buying a live mouse artwork, as an NFT, may also carry the corresponding painting, and/or the rights to it. )
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date
of the claimed invention to have modify the combination of Fleming, Lipton and Washburn with Kapur’s teaching. One of ordinary skills in the art would have been motivated in order to ensure that the ownership of the NFT directly corresponds to the ability to claim the underlying physical asset.
Furthermore, the claimed limitation “…represents a right to call for delivery of the physical asset” is non-functional material that does not move to distinguish over prior art.
Conclusion
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20230230069 A1 to Voorhees discloses: A non-fungible blockchain token (NFT) transferable from wallet to wallet on a blockchain represents ownership of a physical diamond custodied in a secure vault. The NFT can be sold and resold to investors wishing to use the diamond as a store of value. The NFT owner, who may only be known by a blockchain wallet address, can communicate with the custodian, the issuer, auditors, and more by writing signal messages into the blockchain NFT. A diamond custody controller unit at the custodian includes a trusted program module to handle private cryptographic key functions and to output retrieval and shipping instructions when a signal message indicates the NFT owner instructs the custodian to move the diamond to a new custodian. The NFT owner can also write signal messages into the NFT to instruct other parties, such as auditors, to perform services relating to the diamond.
US 20190366475 A1 to Scarselli discloses: A method of tokenization and use of assets, comprising: a) registering at least one asset on a distributed ledger; b) assigning the at least one asset a fungible or non-fungible token with a public key; c) reading information about the at least one asset using a reading device; d) verifying ownership of the at least one asset using a private key which matches the public key; and, e) performing a transaction with the at least one asset.
US 20230005000 A1 to DeLuca discloses: According to one embodiment, a method, computer system, and computer program product for identifying commercialization opportunities for digital twin resources captured on a sensor is provided. The present invention may include receiving digital content pertaining to a physical asset captured by the sensor; responsive to determining that no digital twin resources within a digital twin content store associated with the physical asset exceed a threshold level of similarity to the digital content, uploading the digital content to the digital twin content store based on a user response to one or more prompts.
US 20240412201 A1 to Fleming discloses: Systems and methods for wallet information and/or user information registration and verification are disclosed. Wallet information, such as a wallet identification (ID), and/or user information may be requested to be registered with an wallet ID registry. A record of the registration may be generated for the wallet ID registry such that the wallet ID registry may be searchable and/or offer functionality such as contractual obligations, insurance provision, and/or verification, among other benefits and functionalities.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JANICE LOZA whose telephone number is (571)270-3979. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30am - 5:00pm.
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, Patrick McAtee can be reached at (571) 272-7575. 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.
/J.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3698
/STEVEN S KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3698