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 .
Claim Status
Claims 1-30 are pending.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required:
Claim 1 recites “generating, via the generative module and based at least in part on the first data […] and causing second data associated with the digital object to be stored on a second distributed ledger.” The above limitation is not supported by the specification. The specification [0275] states “generative media content model is based at least in part on both a first NFT data (stored on first distributed ledger) and the second NFT data (stored on second distributed ledger).” The broadest reasonable interpretation according to the knowledge of a skilled artisan will be given to first data and second data.
Claims 11 and 21 recite similar language.
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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Irazabal (US 2019/0122155) in view of LaMontagne (US 11,461,437) in view of Nishida (US 2024/0046264).
Examiner Note: Above references are designated combination A.
a network interface;
a generative module;
one or more processors; and
memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the
computing device to perform operations comprising:
Irazabal FIG. 1
receiving, via the network interface, first data from a first distributed ledger;
generating, via the generative module and based at least in part on the first data, a
digital object comprising generative content; and
Irazabal [0020] The following described exemplary embodiments provide a system, method and program product for blockchain enabled crowdsourcing. As such, the present embodiment has the capacity to improve the technical field of crowdsourcing by generating audio and video closed captioning and video scene descriptions using blockchain enabled crowdsourcing. More specifically, content providers may allow volunteer participants, via crowdsourcing on a blockchained system environment, to create the work product to provide closed captioning and scene description information to the content providers
Irazabal [0033] Referring to FIG. 1, an exemplary networked computer environment 100 in accordance with one embodiment is depicted. The networked computer environment 100 may include a computer 102 with a processor 104 and a data storage device 106 that is enabled to run a software program 108 and a blockchain enabled crowdsourcing program 110a. The networked computer environment 100 may also include a server 112 that is enabled to run a blockchain enabled crowdsourcing program 110b that may interact with a database 114 and a communication network 116. The networked computer environment 100 may include a plurality of computers 102 and servers 112, only one of which is shown. The communication network 116 may include various types of communication networks, such as a wide area network (WAN), local area network (LAN), a telecommunication network, a wireless network, a public switched network and/or a satellite network. It should be appreciated that FIG. 1 provides only an illustration of one implementation and does not imply any limitations with regard to the environments in which different embodiments may be implemented. Many modifications to the depicted environments may be made based on design and implementation requirements.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Irazabal to obtain above limitation based on the
Irazabal discloses elements of the claimed invention as disclosed above but does not disclose first distributed ledger. However, LaMontagne discloses:
LaMontagne 11,461,437 claim 6, The system of claim 1, wherein the second identifier hash value is retrieved from a blockchain stored in a decentralized and distributed digital ledger associated with the NFT.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Irazabal to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of LaMontagne for the purpose of verification of a digital asset owner, see abstract.
Irazabal discloses elements of the claimed invention as disclosed above but does not disclose causing second data associated with the digital object to be stored on a second
distributed ledger. However, Nishida discloses:
Nishida [0153] Next, each of aggregator apparatus 10 and purchaser apparatus 20 executes a consensus algorithm to generate a block that includes the second transaction data and stores the generated block in second distributed ledger 112 (S126).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Irazabal to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Nishida for the purpose of executing a first smart contract recorded in a first blockchain by recording the transaction data in the first blockchain; and executing a second smart contract recorded in a second blockchain different from the first blockchain based on the first smart contract, see abstract.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over combination A in view of Saur (US 2018/0145836)
Reference combination A discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose wherein the first distributed ledger and the second distributed ledger comprise the same distributed ledger. However, Saur discloses:
Saur [0050] The present technology may also provide a distributed ledger that is immune to more types of attacks than other kinds of distributed ledgers. For example, a distributed ledger that is partitioned according to a distributed hash table based on network addresses may be subject to a Sybil attack where a node creates several identities for itself and then uses whatever identity provides the most strategic position at the time. By contrast, according to the present disclosure, partitioning may be based on originator IDs, and the originator ID for each node may be independent of the network address for that node.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify reference combination A to obtain above limitation based on the
teachings of Saur for the purpose of providing a distributed ledger that is immune to more types of attacks than other kinds of distributed ledgers.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference combination
A in view of Nixon (US 2020/0226123)
Reference combination A discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose wherein the first distributed ledger is associated with a first blockchain layer, and wherein the second distributed ledger is associated with a second blockchain layer different from the first blockchain layer. However, Nixon discloses:
Nixon [0186] 16. The method according to any one of aspects 9-15, wherein the first layer of
the distributed ledger is public and the second layer of the distributed layer is private.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to modify reference combination A to obtain above limitation based on the
teachings of Nixon for the purpose of providing distributed ledgers to execute smart contracts to
allow machines such as field devices to transact by themselves without human intervention
[abstract]
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference combination
A in view of Ferenczi (US 2023/0034169).
Regarding claim 4, reference combination A discloses elements of the claimed invention as
noted but does not disclose wherein the first data comprises non-fungible token (NFT) data, and
wherein generating the digital object is based at least in part on properties associated with the
NFT data.
However, Ferenczi discloses:
Ferenczi [0010] According to various examples, a client device associated with a user requesting
a non-fungible credential token generates a cryptographic key-pair comprising a private key and
a public key. Upon sending a request to a token issuer to create the non-fungible token, the client
device provides the public key to the token issuer. The token issuer creates the non-fungible
token for the user by invoking an NFT smart contract on a distributed ledger (e.g., blockchain)
that is associated with the token issuer. The non-fungible token created by the token issuer
includes a mapping of the public key (or other type of unique user identifier) with a credential
ticket that indicates verification of the given user or user account.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to modify reference combination A to obtain above limitation based on the
teachings of Ferenczi for the purpose of sending a request to a token issuer to create the non-fungible token.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference combination A
Reference combination A discloses wherein first data comprises at least one of: physiological sensor data; networked device sensor data; environmental data; device characteristic data; device state; user history data; oracle data; or user data.
Xue [0011] lines 24-32, The memory also includes a footage processor for processing the multimedia footage received by the receiving module to obtain a non-fungible token (NFT) footage. The multimedia footage is selected from the group comprising of a film/movie, a TV show, a photo, an audio, a drawing, a video, cast information, crew information, a plot detail, a review, a movie clip, a music footage, a still-image, an animation, film/movie trailers, show trailers and so forth.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference combination A in view of Uhr (US 11,544,640)
Reference combination A discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose wherein receiving the first data comprises connecting to a user wallet the holds a token on the first distributed ledger.
However, Uhr discloses:
Uhr abstract, The present invention relates to a method for providing an online ticket service by
using a blockchain network, comprising steps of: (a) in response to acquiring ticket reservation
information corresponding to a ticket purchased by a purchaser from a ticket sale server, creating
a ticket token corresponding to the ticket by referring to the ticket reservation information, and
registering generated information on the ticket token in a distributed ledger of a blockchain
network; and (b) transmitting the ticket token to a seller token wallet corresponding to the seller
of the ticket, thereby (i) causing the seller token wallet to transmit the ticket token to a user token
wallet corresponding to the user of the ticket, and (ii) registering movement information of the
ticket token from the seller token wallet to the user token wallet in the distributed ledger of the
blockchain network.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to modify reference combination A to obtain above limitation based on the
teachings of Uhr for the purpose of providing an online ticket service by using a blockchain
network,
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference combination
A in view of Azarm (US 8,595,232)
Reference combination A discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose wherein receiving the first data comprises accessing a code associated with a physical media object via a control device. However, Azarm discloses:
Azarm claim 15, wherein the first descriptive information includes a unique identification code associated with the physical media product that stores the particular media content, and wherein the first identifier includes the unique identification code. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify reference combination A to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Azarm for the purpose of providing systems and methods of linking media content information [abstract].
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference combination A in view of Dorogusker
Regarding claim 8, reference combination A discloses wherein the first data is associated with a
smart contract, and wherein generating the digital object is performed at least in part by
executing the smart contract. However, Dorogusker discloses:
Dorogusker [0127] The distributed ledger 208 is configured to store NFTs. In some embodiments, the distributed ledger 208 can be a blockchain network, particularly a blockchain network that supports smart contracts. One such blockchain network is the ETHEREUM network.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify reference combination to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Dorogusker for the purpose of configuring a distributed ledger to store NFTs.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference combination
A in view of McDonald (US 2022/0405066)
Reference combination A discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose wherein the digital object comprises a digital object for use in a game. However, McDonald discloses:
[0001] Computing execution environments, such as distributed video game environments, bot
networks, and complex financial transaction environments have become ubiquitous. In many
such environments, participants can be represented as an object with privileges and characteristics. For example, in a video game environment, a player avatar may have specific
capabilities, such as speed, agility, and strength.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify reference combination A to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of McDonald for the purpose of representing participants as an object with privileges and characteristics.
Regarding claim 10, reference combination A in view of McDonald discloses wherein the digital object comprises an avatar or character.
McDonald [0001] Computing execution environments, such as distributed video game environments, bot networks, and complex financial transaction environments have become ubiquitous. In many such environments, participants can be represented as an object with privileges and characteristics. For example, in a video game environment, a player avatar may have specific capabilities, such as speed, agility, and strength.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Irazabal (US 2019/0122155) in view of LaMontagne (US 11,461,437) in view of Nishida (US 2024/0046264).
Examiner Note: Above references are designated combination A.
receiving, via a computing device, first data from a first distributed ledger;
generating, via a generative module of the computing device and based at least in part on the first data, a digital object comprising generative content; and
Irazabal [0020] The following described exemplary embodiments provide a system, method and program product for blockchain enabled crowdsourcing. As such, the present embodiment has the capacity to improve the technical field of crowdsourcing by generating audio and video closed captioning and video scene descriptions using blockchain enabled crowdsourcing. More specifically, content providers may allow volunteer participants, via crowdsourcing on a blockchained system environment, to create the work product to provide closed captioning and scene description information to the content providers
Irazabal [0033] Referring to FIG. 1, an exemplary networked computer environment 100 in accordance with one embodiment is depicted. The networked computer environment 100 may include a computer 102 with a processor 104 and a data storage device 106 that is enabled to run a software program 108 and a blockchain enabled crowdsourcing program 110a. The networked computer environment 100 may also include a server 112 that is enabled to run a blockchain enabled crowdsourcing program 110b that may interact with a database 114 and a communication network 116. The networked computer environment 100 may include a plurality of computers 102 and servers 112, only one of which is shown. The communication network 116 may include various types of communication networks, such as a wide area network (WAN), local area network (LAN), a telecommunication network, a wireless network, a public switched network and/or a satellite network. It should be appreciated that FIG. 1 provides only an illustration of one implementation and does not imply any limitations with regard to the environments in which different embodiments may be implemented. Many modifications to the depicted environments may be made based on design and implementation requirements.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Irazabal to obtain above limitation based on the
Irazabal discloses elements of the claimed invention as disclosed above but does not disclose first distributed ledger. However, LaMontagne discloses:
LaMontagne 11,461,437 claim 6, The system of claim 1, wherein the second identifier hash value is retrieved from a blockchain stored in a decentralized and distributed digital ledger associated with the NFT.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Irazabal to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of LaMontagne for the purpose of verification of a digital asset owner, see abstract.
Irazabal discloses elements of the claimed invention as disclosed above but does not disclose
storing, on a second distributed ledger, second data associated with the digital object.
However, Nishida discloses:
Nishida [0153] Next, each of aggregator apparatus 10 and purchaser apparatus 20 executes a consensus algorithm to generate a block that includes the second transaction data and stores the generated block in second distributed ledger 112 (S126).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Irazabal to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Nishida for the purpose of executing a first smart contract recorded in a first blockchain by recording the transaction data in the first blockchain; and executing a second smart contract recorded in a second blockchain different from the first blockchain based on the first smart contract, see abstract.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference combination A in view of Saur (US 2018/0145836)
Reference combination A discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose wherein the first distributed ledger and the second distributed ledger comprise the same distributed ledger. However, Saur discloses:
Saur [0050] The present technology may also provide a distributed ledger that is immune to more types of attacks than other kinds of distributed ledgers. For example, a distributed ledger that is partitioned according to a distributed hash table based on network addresses may be subject to a Sybil attack where a node creates several identities for itself and then uses whatever identity provides the most strategic position at the time. By contrast, according to the present disclosure, partitioning may be based on originator IDs, and the originator ID for each node may be independent of the network address for that node.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify reference combination A to obtain above limitation based on the
teachings of Saur for the purpose of providing a distributed ledger that is immune to more types of attacks than other kinds of distributed ledgers.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference combination A in view of Nixon (US 2020/0226123)
Reference combination A discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose wherein the first distributed ledger is associated with a first blockchain layer, and wherein the second distributed ledger is associated with a second blockchain layer different from the first blockchain layer. However, Nixon discloses:
Nixon [0186] 16. The method according to any one of aspects 9-15, wherein the first layer of
the distributed ledger is public and the second layer of the distributed layer is private.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to modify reference combination A to obtain above limitation based on the
teachings of Nixon for the purpose of providing distributed ledgers to execute smart contracts to
allow machines such as field devices to transact by themselves without human intervention
[abstract]
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference combination A in view of Ferenczi (US 2023/0034169).
Reference combination A discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose wherein the first data comprises non-fungible token (NFT) data, and wherein generating the digital object is based at least in part on properties associated with the NFT data.
However, Ferenczi discloses:
Ferenczi [0010] According to various examples, a client device associated with a user requesting
a non-fungible credential token generates a cryptographic key-pair comprising a private key and
a public key. Upon sending a request to a token issuer to create the non-fungible token, the client
device provides the public key to the token issuer. The token issuer creates the non-fungible
token for the user by invoking an NFT smart contract on a distributed ledger (e.g., blockchain)
that is associated with the token issuer. The non-fungible token created by the token issuer
includes a mapping of the public key (or other type of unique user identifier) with a credential
ticket that indicates verification of the given user or user account.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to modify reference combination A to obtain above limitation based on the
teachings of Ferenczi for the purpose of sending a request to a token issuer to create the non-fungible token.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference combination A
Combination A discloses wherein first data comprises at least one of: physiological sensor data; networked device sensor data; environmental data; device characteristic data; device state; user history data; oracle data; or user data.
Xue [0011] The memory also includes a footage processor for processing the multimedia footage received by the receiving module to obtain a non-fungible token (NFT) footage. The multimedia footage is selected from the group comprising of a film/movie, a TV show, a photo, an audio, a drawing, a video, cast information, crew information, a plot detail, a review, a movie clip, a music footage, a still-image, an animation, film/movie trailers, show trailers and so forth.
The customization information comprises non-fungible token (NFT) owner specified footage related information (owner information, copyright information, intellectual property information, change instruction of the original work, etc.), personal information (include name, signature, address, phone number, place of birth, etc.), and/or personal biometric information (include a height, a weight, a blood type, an eye color, a fingerprint, iris patterns, DNA information, etc.), and/or additional multimedia information (text, audio, still image, animation, video and interactivity, etc.) and/or combination thereof. The memory also includes a footage processor for processing the multimedia footage received by the receiving module to obtain a non-fungible token (NFT) footage. The multimedia footage is selected from the group comprising of a film/movie, a TV show, a photo, an audio, a drawing, a video, cast information, crew information, a p
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference combination A in view of Uhr (US 11,544,640)
Reference combination A discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose wherein receiving the first data comprises connecting to a user wallet that holds a token on the first distributed ledger. However, Uhr discloses:
Uhr abstract, The present invention relates to a method for providing an online ticket service by
using a blockchain network, comprising steps of: (a) in response to acquiring ticket reservation
information corresponding to a ticket purchased by a purchaser from a ticket sale server, creating
a ticket token corresponding to the ticket by referring to the ticket reservation information, and
registering generated information on the ticket token in a distributed ledger of a blockchain
network; and (b) transmitting the ticket token to a seller token wallet corresponding to the seller
of the ticket, thereby (i) causing the seller token wallet to transmit the ticket token to a user token
wallet corresponding to the user of the ticket, and (ii) registering movement information of the
ticket token from the seller token wallet to the user token wallet in the distributed ledger of the
blockchain network.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to modify reference combination A to obtain above limitation based on the
teachings of Uhr for the purpose of providing an online ticket service by using a blockchain
network,
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference combination
A in view of Azarm (US 8,595,232)
Reference combination A discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose wherein receiving the first data comprises accessing a code associated with a physical media object via a control device. However, Azarm discloses:
Azarm claim 15, wherein the first descriptive information includes a unique identification code associated with the physical media product that stores the particular media content, and wherein the first identifier includes the unique identification code. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify reference combination A to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Azarm for the purpose of providing systems and methods of linking media content information [abstract].
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference combination A in view of Dorogusker
Reference combination A discloses wherein the first data is associated with a smart contract, and wherein generating the digital object is performed at least in part by executing the smart contract. However, Dorogusker discloses:
Dorogusker [0127] The distributed ledger 208 is configured to store NFTs. In some embodiments, the distributed ledger 208 can be a blockchain network, particularly a blockchain network that supports smart contracts. One such blockchain network is the ETHEREUM network.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify reference combination to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Dorogusker for the purpose of configuring a distributed ledger to store NFTs.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference combination
A in view of McDonald (US 2022/0405066)
Reference combination A discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose wherein the digital object comprises a digital object for use in a game. However, McDonald discloses:
[0001] Computing execution environments, such as distributed video game environments, bot
networks, and complex financial transaction environments have become ubiquitous. In many
such environments, participants can be represented as an object with privileges and characteristics. For example, in a video game environment, a player avatar may have specific
capabilities, such as speed, agility, and strength.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify reference combination A to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of McDonald for the purpose of representing participants as an object with privileges and characteristics.
Regarding claim 20, reference combination A in view of McDonald discloses wherein the digital object comprises an avatar or character.
[0001] Computing execution environments, such as distributed video game environments, bot networks, and complex financial transaction environments have become ubiquitous. In many such environments, participants can be represented as an object with privileges and characteristics. For example, in a video game environment, a player avatar may have specific capabilities, such as speed, agility, and strength.
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Irazabal (US 2019/0122155) in view of LaMontagne (US 11,461,437) in view of Nishida (US 2024/0046264).
Examiner Note: Above references are designated combination A.
receiving, via a computing device, first data from a first distributed ledger;
generating, via a generative module of the computing device and based at least in part on the first data, a digital object comprising generative content; and
Irazabal [0020] The following described exemplary embodiments provide a system, method and program product for blockchain enabled crowdsourcing. As such, the present embodiment has the capacity to improve the technical field of crowdsourcing by generating audio and video closed captioning and video scene descriptions using blockchain enabled crowdsourcing. More specifically, content providers may allow volunteer participants, via crowdsourcing on a blockchained system environment, to create the work product to provide closed captioning and scene description information to the content providers
Irazabal [0033] Referring to FIG. 1, an exemplary networked computer environment 100 in accordance with one embodiment is depicted. The networked computer environment 100 may include a computer 102 with a processor 104 and a data storage device 106 that is enabled to run a software program 108 and a blockchain enabled crowdsourcing program 110a. The networked computer environment 100 may also include a server 112 that is enabled to run a blockchain enabled crowdsourcing program 110b that may interact with a database 114 and a communication network 116. The networked computer environment 100 may include a plurality of computers 102 and servers 112, only one of which is shown. The communication network 116 may include various types of communication networks, such as a wide area network (WAN), local area network (LAN), a telecommunication network, a wireless network, a public switched network and/or a satellite network. It should be appreciated that FIG. 1 provides only an illustration of one implementation and does not imply any limitations with regard to the environments in which different embodiments may be implemented. Many modifications to the depicted environments may be made based on design and implementation requirements.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Irazabal to obtain above limitation based on the
Irazabal discloses elements of the claimed invention as disclosed above but does not disclose first distributed ledger. However, LaMontagne discloses:
LaMontagne 11,461,437 claim 6, The system of claim 1, wherein the second identifier hash value is retrieved from a blockchain stored in a decentralized and distributed digital ledger associated with the NFT.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Irazabal to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of LaMontagne for the purpose of verification of a digital asset owner, see abstract.
Irazabal discloses elements of the claimed invention as disclosed above but does not disclose
storing, on a second distributed ledger, second data associated with the digital object.
However, Nishida discloses:
Nishida [0153] Next, each of aggregator apparatus 10 and purchaser apparatus 20 executes a consensus algorithm to generate a block that includes the second transaction data and stores the generated block in second distributed ledger 112 (S126).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Irazabal to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Nishida for the purpose of executing a first smart contract recorded in a first blockchain by recording the transaction data in the first blockchain; and executing a second smart contract recorded in a second blockchain different from the first blockchain based on the first smart contract, see abstract.
Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference combination A in view of Saur (US 2018/0145836)
Reference combination A discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose wherein the first distributed ledger and the second distributed ledger comprise the same distributed ledger. However, Saur discloses:
Saur [0050] The present technology may also provide a distributed ledger that is immune to more types of attacks than other kinds of distributed ledgers. For example, a distributed ledger that is partitioned according to a distributed hash table based on network addresses may be subject to a Sybil attack where a node creates several identities for itself and then uses whatever identity provides the most strategic position at the time. By contrast, according to the present disclosure, partitioning may be based on originator IDs, and the originator ID for each node may be independent of the network address for that node.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify reference combination A to obtain above limitation based on the
teachings of Saur for the purpose of providing a distributed ledger that is immune to more types of attacks than other kinds of distributed ledgers.
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference combination A in view of Nixon (US 2020/0226123)
Reference combination A discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose wherein the first distributed ledger is associated with a first blockchain layer, and wherein the second distributed ledger is associated with a second blockchain layer different from the first blockchain layer. However, Nixon discloses:
Nixon [0186] 16. The method according to any one of aspects 9-15, wherein the first layer of
the distributed ledger is public and the second layer of the distributed layer is private.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to modify reference combination A to obtain above limitation based on the
teachings of Nixon for the purpose of providing distributed ledgers to execute smart contracts to
allow machines such as field devices to transact by themselves without human intervention
[abstract]
Claim(s) 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference combination A in view of Ferenczi (US 2023/0034169).
Reference combination A discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose wherein the first data comprises non-fungible token (NFT) data, and wherein generating the digital object is based at least in part on properties associated with the NFT data.
However, Ferenczi discloses:
Ferenczi [0010] According to various examples, a client device associated with a user requesting
a non-fungible credential token generates a cryptographic key-pair comprising a private key and
a public key. Upon sending a request to a token issuer to create the non-fungible token, the client
device provides the public key to the token issuer. The token issuer creates the non-fungible
token for the user by invoking an NFT smart contract on a distributed ledger (e.g., blockchain)
that is associated with the token issuer. The non-fungible token created by the token issuer
includes a mapping of the public key (or other type of unique user identifier) with a credential
ticket that indicates verification of the given user or user account.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to modify reference combination A to obtain above limitation based on the
teachings of Ferenczi for the purpose of sending a request to a token issuer to create the non-fungible token.
Claim(s) 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference combination A
Combination A discloses wherein first data comprises at least one of: physiological sensor data; networked device sensor data; environmental data; device characteristic data; device state; user history data; oracle data; or user data.
Xue [0011] lines 24-32, The memory also includes a footage processor for processing the multimedia footage received by the receiving module to obtain a non-fungible token (NFT) footage. The multimedia footage is selected from the group comprising of a film/movie, a TV show, a photo, an audio, a drawing, a video, cast information, crew information, a plot detail, a review, a movie clip, a music footage, a still-image, an animation, film/movie trailers, show trailers and so forth.
Claim(s) 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference combination A in view of Uhr (US 11,544,640)
Reference combination A discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose wherein receiving the first data comprises connecting to a user wallet that holds a token on the first distributed ledger. However, Uhr discloses:
Uhr abstract, The present invention relates to a method for providing an online ticket service by
using a blockchain network, comprising steps of: (a) in response to acquiring ticket reservation
information corresponding to a ticket purchased by a purchaser from a ticket sale server, creating
a ticket token corresponding to the ticket by referring to the ticket reservation information, and
registering generated information on the ticket token in a distributed ledger of a blockchain
network; and (b) transmitting the ticket token to a seller token wallet corresponding to the seller
of the ticket, thereby (i) causing the seller token wallet to transmit the ticket token to a user token
wallet corresponding to the user of the ticket, and (ii) registering movement information of the
ticket token from the seller token wallet to the user token wallet in the distributed ledger of the
blockchain network.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to modify reference combination A to obtain above limitation based on the
teachings of Uhr for the purpose of providing an online ticket service by using a blockchain
network,
Claim(s) 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference combination
A in view of Azarm (US 8,595,232)
Reference combination A discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose wherein receiving the first data comprises accessing a code associated with a physical media object via a control device. However, Azarm discloses:
Azarm claim 15, wherein the first descriptive information includes a unique identification code associated with the physical media product that stores the particular media content, and wherein the first identifier includes the unique identification code. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify reference combination A to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Azarm for the purpose of providing systems and methods of linking media content information [abstract].
Claim(s) 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference combination A in view of Dorogusker
Reference combination A discloses wherein the first data is associated with a smart contract, and wherein generating the digital object is performed at least in part by executing the smart contract. However, Dorogusker discloses:
Dorogusker [0127] The distributed ledger 208 is configured to store NFTs. In some embodiments, the distributed ledger 208 can be a blockchain network, particularly a blockchain network that supports smart contracts. One such blockchain network is the ETHEREUM network.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify reference combination to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Dorogusker for the purpose of configuring a distributed ledger to store NFTs.
Claim(s) 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference combination
A in view of McDonald (US 2022/0405066)
Reference combination A discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose wherein the digital object comprises a digital object for use in a game. However, McDonald discloses:
[0001] Computing execution environments, such as distributed video game environments, bot
networks, and complex financial transaction environments have become ubiquitous. In many
such environments, participants can be represented as an object with privileges and characteristics. For example, in a video game environment, a player avatar may have specific
capabilities, such as speed, agility, and strength.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify reference combination A to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of McDonald for the purpose of representing participants as an object with privileges and characteristics.
Regarding claim 30, reference combination A in view of McDonald discloses wherein the digital object comprises an avatar or character.
[0001] Computing execution environments, such as distributed video game environments, bot networks, and complex financial transaction environments have become ubiquitous. In many such environments, participants can be represented as an object with privileges and characteristics. For example, in a video game environment, a player avatar may have specific capabilities, such as speed, agility, and strength.
Response to Arguments
Applicant Argues:
Response to the Section 103 Rejection of Claims 1, 5, 11, 15, 21, and 25 (Xue and
Samarthyam)
Claims 1, 5, 11, 15, 21, and 25 were rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over the combination of Xue and Samarthyam. Applicant respectfully traverses this rejection. For at least the following reasons, Xue in view of Samarthyam, whether considered individually or in combination, fail to disclose or suggest all of the features of these claims. As a result, the Section 103 rejection of claims 1, 5, 11, 15, 21, and 25 should be withdrawn.
Each of independent claims 1, 11, and 21 requires (i) receiving first data from a first distributed ledger, (ii) generating, based at least in part on the first data, a digital object comprising generative content, and (iii) causing second data associated with the digital object to be stored on a second distributed ledger. The rejection maps these limitations onto Xue's NFT- minting system in a manner that is internally inconsistent and that does not account for the recited data flow.
i. Xue does not receive first data "from" a distributed ledger.
The Office Action maps the claimed "first data" to Xue's multimedia footage and the "first distributed ledger" to Xue's statement that NFTs "can be stored in distributed ledgers" (Office Action, pages 3-5). But in Xue, the multimedia footage is not retrievedfrom a distributed ledger as an input. Rather, Xue's receiving module obtains the footage from an owner or uploader, the footage is processed into NFT-compliant footage, and the result is ultimately stored to a blockchain. Xue's data flow proceeds in the direction of footage -> processing/minting -- storage on the blockchain (Xue at para. [0011], [0055]-[0061] and FIG. 4). The claims require the opposite at the input stage: data is first received from a distributed ledger, and that data then serves as the basis for generation. Xue does not disclose or suggest retrieving the mapped "first data" from any distributed ledger, and the rejection does not identify any such retrieval.
ii. Xue does not generate a digital object comprising generative content based on the first data.
The rejection maps both the claimed "digital object" and the claimed "generative content" to the same disclosure in Xue: "customization information is one of, non-fungible token owner specified footage" (Office Action, page 5). Claim 1, however, separately recites a digital object comprising generative content that is generated based at least in part on the first data. Mapping two distinct claim terms to a single item of user-supplied metadata does not establish that Xue discloses generating generative content from first data.
Xue's customization information is information specified and supplied by the owner (e.g., owner information, copyright information, name, signature, address, and biometric data (Xue [0011], [0032])). Xue's system encodes and embeds this supplied information and logs it to a blockchain to mint an NFT. Xue does not disclose generating content; it organizes and records information that the owner provides. Receiving owner-supplied metadata and embedding it is not "generating... a digital object comprising generative content" as recited in the independent claims.
The specification confirms that this distinction is meaningful. As described in paragraph [0023], "[g]enerative media content is content that is dynamically synthesized, created, and/or modified based on an algorithm" by a "non-human, rule-based process such as an algorithm or model." Xue contains no such dynamic synthesizing, creating, or modifying process; its information encoder and NFT mint program record owner-supplied information rather than algorithmically producing content.
iii. Mapping Xue's "generation system" to the claimed "generative module" is conclusory.
The rejection equates the claimed "generative module" with Xue's "customized non- fungible token (NFT) generation system" (Office Action, pages 3-5). But a system that mints an NFT by logging owner-supplied information to a blockchain is not a module that generates a digital object comprising generative content based on input data. The Office Action does not identify any algorithm, model, or rule-based synthesis in Xue that produces content from the mapped first data. The label "generation system" in Xue refers to generating (i.e., minting) a token,-9-
not generating content from data received from a ledger. The two are not the same, and the rejection supplies no reasoning bridging them.
iv. Samarthyam does not cure these deficiencies.
Samarthyam is relied upon solely for "causing second data... to be stored on a second distributed ledger," via the disclosure of storing media-content playback settings in distributed- ledger sub-nodes (Samarthyam, col. 29, 1. 55 - col. 30, 1. 4). Samarthyam is directed to controlling playback of media content across devices in a Mobility-as-a-Service transportation network, and the cited passage concerns storing playback settings (e.g., volume, display settings, playback speed). Samarthyam is not relied upon for, and does not disclose, generating a digital object comprising generative content based on data received from a distributed ledger. Accordingly, Samarthyam does not supply the limitations missing from Xue.
Because neither reference, alone or in combination, teaches or suggests generating a digital object comprising generative content based at least in part on first data received from a first distributed ledger, the combination fails to establish a prima facie case of obviousness as to claims 1, 11, and 21.
v. The articulated reason to combine is insufficient.
The Office Action states that one would modify Xue based on Samarthyam "for the purpose of providing media content playback settings," and asserts that Samarthyam is "analogous art from the same field of endeavor." Xue is directed to minting authenticity-certificate NFTs in the entertainment context; it does not describe playback of media across devices, and the record does not explain why a system for minting authenticity NFTs would be provided with "media content playback settings" (Office Action, pages 5-6). The bare recitation of a purpose drawn from Samarthyam's own context, without articulated reasoning connecting that purpose to Xue's system, does not establish the requisite rational underpinning for the combination. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 418 (2007); MPEP § 2143.
Accordingly, the Section 103 rejection of independent claims 1, 11, and 21 should be withdrawn. The remaining claims are patentable by virtue of their dependency in addition to
reciting further distinguishing features. Accordingly, the Section 103 rejection of these claims should be withdrawn for at least the reasons discussed above.
Examiner Responds:
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-30 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ETIENNE PIERRE LEROUX whose telephone number is (571)272-4022. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 am to 4:30 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Apu Mofiz can be reached at 571 272 4080. 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.
/ETIENNE P LEROUX/ Primary Examiner of Art Unit 2161
Prosecution Insights