DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
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 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Subject Matter Eligibility Standard
When considering subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. 101, it must be determined whether the claim is directed to one of the four statutory categories of invention, i.e., process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter.
Specifically, claim 1 is directed to a method. Claim 6 is directed to a system. Each of the claims falls under one of the four statutory classes of invention.
If the claim does fall within one of the statutory categories, it must then be determined whether the claim is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., law of nature, natural phenomenon, and abstract idea).
Claim 1 recites:
A computer implemented method for secure exchange of currency, the computer implemented method comprising:
transmitting, by a controller, a receiver digital certificate issued to a receiver, to a sender device associated with a sender, wherein the receiver digital certificate comprises a receiver public key assigned to the receiver and receiver identification details belonging to the receiver;
receiving, by the controller, a financial message indicative of transfer of a predetermined amount of a currency, from a sender financial account assigned to the sender, to a receiver financial account assigned to the receiver, wherein the financial message comprises the receiver identification details;
facilitating, by the controller, transfer of the predetermined amount of the currency from the sender financial account to the receiver financial account;
receiving, by the controller, a request for withdrawal of all or a part of the predetermined amount of the currency, from a receiver device associated with the receiver, the request for withdrawal comprising a receiver digital signature associated with the receiver; and
facilitating, by the controller, the withdrawal of the all or the part of the predetermined amount of the currency from the receiver financial account.
Claim 2 recites: further comprising publishing transaction information comprising sender identification details associated with the sender, the receiver identification details, and the all or the part of the predetermined amount of currency withdrawn from the receiver financial account.
Claim 3 recites: wherein the currency is selected from a group comprising fiat currencies and cryptocurrencies.
Claim 4 recites: further comprising:
hashing transaction information comprising sender identification details associated with the sender, the receiver identification details, and the predetermined amount of currency transferred to the receiver financial account, to generate a transaction hash, and adding the transaction hash to a distributed ledger.
Claim 5 recites: further comprising adding a time stamp to the transaction information before generating the transaction hash.
Claim 6 recites: A computer system for secure exchange of currency, the computer system comprising:
a controller, the controller comprising:
a memory unit comprising machine-readable instructions,
a processor operably connected to the memory unit, the processor configured to execute machine-readable instructions, the machine-readable instructions when executed by the processor, enable the processor to:
transmit a receiver digital certificate issued to a receiver, to a sender device associated with a sender, wherein the receiver digital certificate comprises a receiver public key assigned to the receiver and receiver identification details belonging to the receiver,
receive a financial message indicative of transfer of a predetermined amount of a currency, from a sender financial account assigned to the sender, to a receiver financial account assigned to the receiver, wherein the financial message comprises the receiver identification details,
facilitate transfer of the predetermined amount of the currency from the sender financial account to the receiver financial account,
receive a request for withdrawal of all or a part of the predetermined amount of the currency, from a receiver device associated with the receiver, the request for withdrawal comprising a receiver digital signature associated with the receiver, and
facilitate the withdrawal of the all or the part of the predetermined amount of the currency from the receiver financial account.
Claim 7 recites: wherein the processor is further enabled to publish transaction information comprising sender identification details associated with the sender, the receiver identification details, and the predetermined amount of currency transferred to the receiver financial account.
Claim 8 recites: wherein the currency is selected from a group comprising fiat currencies and cryptocurrencies.
Claim 9 recites: wherein the processor is further enabled to:
a hash transaction information comprising sender identification details associated with the sender, the receiver identification details, and the all or the part of the predetermined amount of currency transferred to the receiver financial account, to generate a transaction hash, and
add the transaction hash to a distributed ledger.
Claim 10 recites: wherein the processor is further enabled to add a time stamp to the hash transaction information before generating the transaction hash.
Here, the claimed concept falls into the category of functions of organizing human activities such as performing commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts, legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors or business relations) because it amounts to the facilitating of a withdrawal of all or a part of a predetermined mount of currency from a receiver financial account.
Step 2A, Prong Two: The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application, In particular, the clams recite the bolded limitations noted above as understood to be the additional limitations.
These limitations performing steps of facilitating transfer of a predetermined amount of currency from a sender financial account to a receiver financial account and also facilitating the withdrawal of all or a part of the predetermined amount of currency from the receiver financial account, merely amount to instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea ( see MPEP 2106.05(1) ), also see applicant's specification for guiding interpretation of these claim features, describing implementation with generic commercially available devices or any machine capable of executing a set of instructions, similarly describing usage of a general and special purpose computer and including generic commercially available devices.
The claimed “controller”, “sender device”, “receiver device” of claim 1, and the claimed “controller” , “processor”, “memory” and the “sender device” and “receiver device” of claim 6 are similarly understood in light of applicant's specification as mere usage of any arrangement of computer software or hardware intermediate components or display components potentially using networks to communicate between devices and display data, “now available or later developed may be used” which are properly understood to be mere instructions to apply the abstraction using a computer or device.
Performance of a receiving step by a computer processor amounts to performing steps which amount io insignificant extra-solution activity of data gathering - see MPEP Z106.05(g).
Performing steps by generic computer processors with memories merely limits the abstraction to computer field by execution by generic computers. See MPEP 2106.05¢h).
As noted in MPEP 2106.04(d), limitations which amount to instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer or merely using a computer as a tool, limitations which amount to insignificant extra-solution activity, and limitations which amount to generally linking to a particular technological environment do not integrate a practical exception into a practical application.
The claims recite receiving data using no specific structural devices even assuming receiving data using specific devices would still be considered as gathering functions using a device performing its intended functions. The breadth of these limitations reasonably includes receiving accessing or collecting data.
Consideration of the steps in the claim as a combination does not change the analysis as they do not add anything compared to when the steps are considered separately. Claim 6 merely recites similar features found in claim 1.
Step 2B: The elements discussed above with respect to the practical application in Step 2A, prong 2 are equally applicable to consideration of whether the claims amount to significantly more. Accordingly, the claims fail to recite additional elements which, when considered individually and in combination, amount to significantly more. Reconsideration of these elements identified as insignificant extra-solution activity as part of Step 2B does not change the analysis.
Receiving, transmitting, facilitating data and transmitting information over a network has been recognized by the courts as well- understood, routine, and conventional (See MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), citing Symantec, 835 F.3d at 1321, 120 OSPQ2d at 1362 (Utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); TL Communications LEC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, G10, L18 USPO2d 1744, 1748 (ed. Cir. 2016) Casing a telephone for image transmission); OFF Techs., fac. v. Amazon.com, fic., 788 B.Ad 1359, 1363, LiS USPO2d 1090, 1093 (ed, Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network}, buySAFE, fic. v. Google, Inc.. 768 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1996 (Pod, Cyr. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network).
Positively reciting a controller, a sending device or a receiver device does not change the analysis as these aspects are properly considered as additional elements which amount to instructions to apply it with a computer.
These claimed elements also as found in the dependent claims are also recited at a high level of generality such that they amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic component.
In processing the claims, it is noted that the recitation of these additional elements do not impact the analysis of the claims because these elements in combination are noted only to be a general purpose computer component for performing basic or routine computer functions. These claimed elements are noted to a be performing routine and conventional functions. These additional elements do not overcome the analysis as these elements are merely considered as additional elements which amount to instructions to be applied to the generic computer.
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claimed “controller” and “sending device” and “receiving device” are recited at a high level of generality such they amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic component. Accordingly, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Accordingly, claims 1 and 6 are directed to an abstract idea.
The dependent claims further define the abstract idea that is present in their respective independent claims 1 and 6 and thus correspond to Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity and hence are abstract for the reasons presented above. The dependent claims do not include any additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception when considered both individually and as an ordered combination. Therefore, the dependent claims are also directed to an abstract idea.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mayblum et al (WO 2022147144 A1).
As per claim 1, Mayblum et al disclose a system and method “for facilitating a transaction between a first entity and a second entity using a digital currency issued by a bank or an entity with a bank charter. In some aspects, a digital wallet is described for one or more digital currencies from one or more financial institutions where the digital wallet is a self-hosted digital wallet.
Mayblum et al state a digital currency is associated with a digital wallet for one or more digital currencies from one or more financial institutions, comprising one or more pairs of public and private keys for a user holding one or more digital currencies from one or more of financial institutions, wherein each pair of public and private keys may be used by the user to receive and/or send a digital currency issued by a financial institution corresponding to the respective pair public and private keys. See page 11 of Mayblum et al.
Mayblum et al inherently teach or disclose:
“transmitting, by a controller, a receiver digital certificate issued to a receiver, to a sender device associated with a sender, wherein the receiver digital certificate comprises a receiver public key assigned to the receiver and receiver identification details belonging to the receiver” since a receiver receives a digital a digital wallet for one or more digital currencies from one or more financial institutions, comprising one or more pairs of public and private keys for a user holding one or more digital currencies from one or more of financial institutions. The one or more financial institution is similar to the claimed controller.
Mayblum et al further teach or disclose:
receiving, by the controller, a financial message indicative of transfer of a predetermined amount of a currency, from a sender financial account assigned to the sender, to a receiver financial account assigned to the receiver, wherein the financial message comprises the receiver identification details (see page 11 of Maublum et al);
facilitating, by the controller, transfer of the predetermined amount of the currency from the sender financial account to the receiver financial account (see also page 11 of Mayblum et al.);;
Mayblum et al do not explicitly state:
receiving, by the controller, a request for withdrawal of all or a part of the predetermined amount of the currency, from a receiver device associated with the receiver, the request for withdrawal comprising a receiver digital signature associated with the receiver; and
facilitating, by the controller, the withdrawal of the all or the part of the predetermined amount of the currency from the receiver financial account”.
As per these limitations, it is well known in the financial art that all or part of a predetermined amount may be withdrawn from an account owned by an entity using the entity’s device. The entity here being the claimed receiver also possesses an electronic device capable of communicating with the financial institution.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to facilitate the withdrawal of the all or the part of the predetermined amount of the currency from the receiver financial account in the system and method of Mayblum et al, as would be desired and/or if the receiver or entity desires to close the account or make a payment using the account.
As per claim 2, Mayblum et al do not teach or disclose:
“publishing transaction information comprising sender identification details associated with the sender, the receiver identification details, and the all or the part of the predetermined amount of currency withdrawn from the receiver financial account”.
Mayblum et al. teach recording the transaction. See page 13 of Mayblum.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to publish identification details associated with a sender , receiver and amount of currency withdrawn from the receiver financial account in the system and method of Mayblum et al for record keeping purposes which could be used for potential dispute resolution.
As per claim 3, Mayblum et al teach or disclose wherein the currency is selected from a group comprising fiat currencies and cryptocurrencies. See page 12 lines 23-31 of Mayblum et al.
Claim(s) 4-5 and 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mayblum et al (WO 2022147144 A1) as applied to claims 1-3 and 6-8 above, and further in view of Singh (US Pub. No. 2024/0089247).
As per claims 4-5 and 9-10, the teachings of Mayblum et al are discussed above. Mayblum et al do not explicitly state “hashing transaction information comprising sender identification details associated with the sender, the receiver identification details, and the predetermined amount of currency transferred to the receiver financial account, to generate a transaction hash, and adding the transaction hash to a distributed ledger”. Using a hash algorithm is well-practiced in the art.
Singh teaches a system and method for performing a financial transaction in a distributed ledger. Singh states at paragraph [0080]:
“[0080] To record the NFT in a distributed ledger (e.g., a blockchain), a transaction object 206 for the NFT 204 is created. The transaction object 206 may include a transaction header 206A and a transaction object data 206B. The transaction header 206A may include a cryptographic hash of the previous transaction object, a nonce (e.g., a randomly generated 32-bit whole number generated when the transaction object is created), cryptographic hash of the current transaction object wedded to the nonce, and a time stamp. The transaction object data 206B may include the NFT 204 being recorded. Once the transaction object 206 is generated, the NFT 204 is considered signed and forever tied to its nonce and hash. The transaction object 206 is then deployed in the distributed ledger 208. At this time, a distributed ledger address is generated for the transaction object 206, i.e., an indication of where it is located on the distributed ledger 208 and captured for recording purposes. Once deployed, the NFT 204 is linked permanently to its hash and the distributed ledger 208, and is considered recorded in the distributed ledger 208, thus concluding the minting process”.
Also in regard to the claimed timestamp, timestamp is usually provided at each occurrence of a multiple step of a transaction and usually kept in a recording of the time of the block generation, allowing the transaction information on the block to be immutable.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Singh into the system and method of Mayblum et al so as to provide a hash method therein in order to determine data tampering, and securing the network.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FRANTZY POINVIL whose telephone number is (571)272-6797. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:00AM to 5:30PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Michael Anderson be reached at 571-270-0508. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/fp/
/FRANTZY POINVIL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3693 January 6, 2026