DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first
inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the application filed on January 30, 2025.
Claim(s) 1-20 are currently pending and have been examined.
This action is made Non-Final.
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.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claim(s) 1-20 are directed to a system, method, or product, which are/is one of the statutory categories of invention. (Step 1: YES).
The Examiner has identified independent method claim 10 as the claim that represents the claimed invention for analysis and is similar to independent method Claim 1 and independent method Claim 15. Claim 10 recites the following limitations:
engaging with a first user for determining a first wallet of virtual funds available to the first user;
accessing [at least one database having simulated tradable assets stored therein], wherein the simulated tradable asset includes at least one cryptocurrency;
accessing [at least one third-party pricing database] having pricing information associated with the simulated tradable assets;
presenting, [via the output display,] at least one of a plurality of tutorials for the first user regarding electronic infrastructure associated with the simulated tradable assets, wherein the electronic infrastructure associated with the simulated tradable asset includes at least one of: an electronic wallet and a blockchain data recording operation;
receiving selection commands from the first user for selecting at least one of the simulated tradable assets;
engaging in a competition of managing a cost of the simulated tradable assets over a defined time period, including: calculating a buy-in cost for the first user based at least on the selection commands and the pricing information associated with the simulated tradable assets, wherein the pricing information includes a gas fee;
electronically deducting the buy-in cost from the first virtual funds;
over the defined time period, further accessing the [at least one third-party pricing database] and updating the pricing information associated with the simulated tradable assets;
upon further updating the pricing information, generate a costs status for the first user based on the pricing information and an ownership volume of the simulated tradable assets;
presenting, [via an output display,] an option for viewing at least one of a plurality of tutorials for the first user regarding simulated tradable assets, the tutorials including information regarding pricing and related information on the simulated tradable assets;
adjusting the buy-in cost accounting for simulated tradable asset infrastructure costs; and
upon completion of the defined time period, generating an output display including a final change in value of the virtual simulated tradable assets and any changes in the virtual funds.
These limitations, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitation as certain methods of organizing human activity because the limitations recite managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation as managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people, then it falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. The at least one database, at least one third-party pricing database, and output display in Claim 10 are just applying generic computer components to the recited abstract limitations. The recitation of generic computer components in a claim does not necessarily preclude that claim from reciting an abstract idea. Claim(s) 1 and 15 are also abstract for similar reasons. (Step 2A-Prong 1: YES. The claims recite an abstract idea)
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claims recite the additional elements of at least one database, at least one third-party pricing database, and an output display. The computer hardware/software is/are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function) such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, these additional elements, when considered separately and as an ordered combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea and are at a high level of generality. Therefore, claim(s) 1, 10, and 15 are directed to an abstract idea without a practical application. (Step 2A-Prong 2: NO. The additional claimed elements are not integrated into a practical application)
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because, when considered separately and as an ordered combination, they do not add significantly more (also known as an “inventive concept”) to the exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using computer hardware amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. Accordingly, these additional elements do not change the outcome of the analysis when considered separately and as an ordered combination. Thus, claim(s) 1, 10, and 15 are not patent eligible. (Step 2B: NO. The claims do not provide significantly more)
Dependent claims
Dependent claim 2 further defines the abstract idea that is present in their respective independent claim 1 and thus correspond to certain methods of organizing human activity and hence are abstract for the reasons presented above. Dependent claim 2 does 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, dependent claim 2 is directed to an abstract idea.
Dependent claim 3 further defines the abstract idea that is present in their respective independent claim 2 and thus correspond to certain methods of organizing human activity and hence are abstract for the reasons presented above. The output display of dependent claim 3 does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the judicial exception when considered both individually and as an ordered combination. Therefore, dependent claim 3 is directed to an abstract idea.
Dependent claim 4 further defines the abstract idea that is present in their respective independent claim 3 and thus correspond to certain methods of organizing human activity and hence are abstract for the reasons presented above. The electronic wallet and blockchain recording operation of dependent claim 4 do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the judicial exception when considered both individually and as an ordered combination. Therefore, dependent claim 4 is directed to an abstract idea.
Dependent claim 5 further defines the abstract idea that is present in their respective independent claim 2 and thus correspond to certain methods of organizing human activity and hence are abstract for the reasons presented above. Dependent claim 5 does 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, dependent claim 5 is directed to an abstract idea.
Dependent claim 6 further defines the abstract idea that is present in their respective independent claim 1 and thus correspond to certain methods of organizing human activity and hence are abstract for the reasons presented above. The gaming processing engine of dependent claim 6 does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the judicial exception when considered both individually and as an ordered combination. Therefore, dependent claim 6 is directed to an abstract idea.
Dependent claim 7 further defines the abstract idea that is present in their respective independent claim 6 and thus correspond to certain methods of organizing human activity and hence are abstract for the reasons presented above. The gaming computing device of dependent claim 7 does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the judicial exception when considered both individually and as an ordered combination. Therefore, dependent claim 7 is directed to an abstract idea.
Dependent claim 8 further defines the abstract idea that is present in their respective independent claim 1 and thus correspond to certain methods of organizing human activity and hence are abstract for the reasons presented above. Dependent claim 8 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, dependent claim 8 is directed to an abstract idea.
Dependent claim 9 further defines the abstract idea that is present in their respective independent claim 1 and thus correspond to certain methods of organizing human activity and hence are abstract for the reasons presented above. Dependent claim 9 does 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, dependent claim 9 is directed to an abstract idea.
Dependent claim 11 further defines the abstract idea that is present in their respective independent claim 10 and thus correspond to certain methods of organizing human activity and hence are abstract for the reasons presented above. The gaming processing engine of dependent claim 11 does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the judicial exception when considered both individually and as an ordered combination. Therefore, dependent claim 11 is directed to an abstract idea.
Dependent claim 12 further defines the abstract idea that is present in their respective independent claim 11 and thus correspond to certain methods of organizing human activity and hence are abstract for the reasons presented above. The gaming computing device of dependent claim 12 does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the judicial exception when considered both individually and as an ordered combination. Therefore, dependent claim 12 is directed to an abstract idea.
Dependent claim 13 further defines the abstract idea that is present in their respective independent claim 10 and thus correspond to certain methods of organizing human activity and hence are abstract for the reasons presented above. Dependent claim 13 does 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, dependent claim 13 is directed to an abstract idea.
Dependent claim 14 further defines the abstract idea that is present in their respective independent claim 10 and thus correspond to certain methods of organizing human activity and hence are abstract for the reasons presented above. Dependent claim 14 does 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, dependent claim 14 is directed to an abstract idea.
Dependent claim 16 further defines the abstract idea that is present in their respective independent claim 15 and thus correspond to certain methods of organizing human activity and hence are abstract for the reasons presented above. Dependent claim 16 does 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, dependent claim 16 is directed to an abstract idea.
Dependent claim 17 further defines the abstract idea that is present in their respective independent claim 16 and thus correspond to certain methods of organizing human activity and hence are abstract for the reasons presented above. The output display of dependent claim 17 does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the judicial exception when considered both individually and as an ordered combination. Therefore, dependent claim 17 is directed to an abstract idea.
Dependent claim 18 further defines the abstract idea that is present in their respective independent claim 17 and thus correspond to certain methods of organizing human activity and hence are abstract for the reasons presented above. The electronic wallet and blockchain data recording operation of dependent claim 18 does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the judicial exception when considered both individually and as an ordered combination. Therefore, dependent claim 18 is directed to an abstract idea.
Dependent claim 19 further defines the abstract idea that is present in their respective independent claim 17 and thus correspond to certain methods of organizing human activity and hence are abstract for the reasons presented above. Dependent claim 19 does 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, dependent claim 19 is directed to an abstract idea.
Dependent claim 20 further defines the abstract idea that is present in their respective independent claim 17 and thus correspond to certain methods of organizing human activity and hence are abstract for the reasons presented above. Dependent claim 20 does 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, dependent claim 20 is 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.
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cella (US 20230173395) in view of Boo (US 20240070659).
Regarding claim(s) 1:
Cella teaches:
accessing at least one database having simulated tradable assets stored therein; (Cella: pgh 1139, “Additional or alternative examples of external knowledge exchanges and/or databases may include stock exchanges, commodities exchanges, derivative exchanges…”)
accessing at least one third-party pricing database having pricing information associated with the simulated tradable assets; (Cella: pgh 611, “The External Data Sources can include any system or device that can provide data to the platform. Examples of data sources can include market data sources (e.g., for financial markets, commercial markets (including e-commerce), advertising markets, energy markets, telecommunication markets, and many others).”)
receiving selection commands from the first user for selecting at least one of the simulated tradable assets; (Cella: pgh 2161, “The user may then initiate a transaction by selecting one or more of the transaction options.”)
engaging in a competition of managing a cost of the simulated tradable assets over a defined time period, including: (Cella: pgh 2260, “For example, points may be awarded for trading goods of a particular type and/or within a particular region. Users who have been awarded points may compete with one another…”)
calculating a buy-in cost for the first user based at least on the selection commands and the pricing information associated with the simulated tradable assets; (Cella: pgh 109, “In embodiments, the models trained by the machine learning system are utilized by the artificial intelligence system to execute simulations on the product twin for predicting the cost and/or the price of the product…Cost prediction may utilize inputs from marketplaces…”)
electronically deducting the buy-in cost from the first virtual funds; (Cella: pgh 1109, “In embodiments, such a smart contract may automatically credit or debit an account, trigger a transfer of value, or the like.”)
over the defined time period, further accessing the at least one third-party pricing database and updating the pricing information associated with the simulated tradable assets; (Cella: pgh 522, “Each of the set of intelligent forecasting engines may use data that is tracked…as well as input data from external data sources…”; pgh 550, “…the platform may include an energy price-aware coin wrapper, or expert system that uses machine learning to optimize the execution of a cryptocurrency transaction based on real time energy price information for an available energy source…An energy price-aware coin may be configured to time such operations based on energy price forecasts, such as with one or more of the intelligent forecasting engines…”)
upon further updating the pricing information, generate a costs status for the first user based on the pricing information and an ownership volume of the simulated tradable assets; (Cella: pgh 1109, “In embodiments, such a smart contract may automatically credit or debit an account, trigger a transfer of value, or the like.”)
presenting, via an output display, an option for viewing at least one of a plurality of tutorials for the first user regarding simulated tradable assets, the tutorials including information regarding pricing and related information on the simulated tradable assets; (Cella: pgh 2017, “In embodiments, automated, machine-learned strategy recognition enables further automation of marketplace strategy, including automated recommendation of trades and automated recommendation of complementary and competitive strategies.”)
upon completion of the defined time period, generating an output display including a final change in value of the virtual simulated tradable assets and any changes in the virtual funds. (Cella: pgh 2246, “The gamificaton of robotic process automation capabilities may include awarding points to users for performing tasks desirable to operation of the market orchestration system platform…For example, points may be awarded for augmentation of a robotic process automation algorithm…digital and/or physical prizes may be awarded to users who have achieved one or more point thresholds and/or have ranked above one or more other users on a points leaderboard.”)
Cella does not teach, however, Boo teaches:
a computerized method for generating simulated asset trading and gamification operations, the computerized method comprising: engaging with a first user for determining a first wallet of virtual funds available to the first user; (Boo: pgh 22, “A digital wallet may comprise a software-based system that securely (and typically in an encrypted format) stores users’ confidential information, personal information, payment information, and/or passwords for numerous payment methods and websites.”)
adjusting the buy-in cost accounting for simulated tradable asset infrastructure costs; and (Boo: pgh 6, “In contrast to this, methods and systems described herein relate to a new gas fee calculation that may allot a dynamic ‘base fee,’ which is burned, and an additional fee that is allocated to the validator.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Cella to include the teachings of Boo for the benefit of “reducing uncertainty related to the cost of the blockchain operation” (Boo: pgh 23).
Regarding claim(s) 2:
The combination of Cella/Boo, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 1. Boo further teaches:
wherein the simulated tradable asset includes a cryptocurrency. (Boo: pgh 46, “…the digital wallet may comprise a repository that allows users to store, manage, and trade their cryptocurrencies and assets…”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Cella to include the teachings of Boo for the benefit of “reducing uncertainty related to the cost of the blockchain operation” (Boo: pgh 23).
Regarding claim(s) 3:
The combination of Cella/Boo, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 2. Cella further teaches:
presenting, via the output display, at least one of a plurality of tutorials for the first user regarding electronic infrastructure associated with the simulated tradable assets. (Cella: pgh 2244, “The human training system may include one or more documents, videos, tutorials, and the like for facilitating human learning of actions and/or techniques for interfacing with the user interfaces.”)
Regarding claim(s) 4:
The combination of Cella/Boo, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 3. Boo further teaches:
wherein the electronic infrastructure associated with the simulated tradable asset includes at least one of: an electronic wallet and a blockchain data recording operation. (Boo: pgh 22, “By using a digital wallet, users can complete communications, purchases, and/or other blockchain operations…”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Cella to include the teachings of Boo for the benefit of “reducing uncertainty related to the cost of the blockchain operation” (Boo: pgh 23).
Regarding claim(s) 5:
The combination of Cella/Boo, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 2. Boo further teaches:
wherein the pricing information includes a gas fee. (Boo: pgh 6, “Within this context, conventional proof-of-stake consensus mechanisms rely on a first-price auction as main gas fee calculation methodology…In such cases, the users with the highest amounts will have their blockchain operations processed first (as the validators chose the blockchain operations with the highest gas fee, whin in turn became their reward).”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Cella to include the teachings of Boo for the benefit of “reducing uncertainty related to the cost of the blockchain operation” (Boo: pgh 23).
Regarding claim(s) 6:
The combination of Cella/Boo, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 1. Cella further teaches:
engaging with a plurality of other users and via user interface operations receiving input commands for the plurality of other users to select a plurality of simulated tradable assets; and (Cella: pgh 2161, “The user may then initiate a transaction by selecting one or more of the transaction options.”)
via a gaming processing engine, electronically track the plurality of users versus the first user during the defined time period. (Cella: pgh 1250, “In embodiments, converged processes may include shared data structures for multiple applications (including ones that track the same transactions on a blockchain but may consume different subsets of available attributes of the data objects maintained in the blockchain or ones that use a set of nodes and links in a common knowledge graph). For example, a transaction indicating a change of ownership of an entity may be stored in a blockchain and used by multiple applications…”)
Regarding claim(s) 7:
The combination of Cella/Boo, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 6. Cella further teaches:
based on the gaming computing device and tracking the first user and other users profit values, upon completion of the defined time period, generating at least one tutorial for display to the first user regarding how to improve the first user's profit value during the defined time period. (Cella: pgh 2217, “In embodiments, an intelligent agent may monitor the track of the actions taken while the strategy is being refined by the user so that the intelligent agent system may train the intelligent agent to generate or recommend strategies to the user in the future.”)
Regarding claim(s) 8:
The combination of Cella/Boo, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 1. Cella further teaches:
wherein the defined time period is at least one of: a predetermined time period selected from a set of time periods and a time period determined by the first user. (Cella: pgh 2262, “The digital replica may simulate the one or more potential future states of a market, a product, a seller, a buyer, a transaction, etc. based on simulation parameters provided by the user. Examples of simulation parameters include a progression of a period of time…”)
Regarding claim(s) 9:
The combination of Cella/Boo, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 1. Cella further teaches:
wherein the simulated tradable assets includes at least one of: a stock, a bond, a coin affiliated with a cryptocurrency, a coin unaffiliated with a cryptocurrency, property index, a media streaming value, and a commodity. (Cella: pgh 1557, “The RPA system may provide automation for one or more aspects of a custodial solution that enables automated custodial management and/or provides a recommendation or plan for a custodial activity relevant to a set of assets…such as for assets of any of the types described herein, including cryptocurrencies, and other currencies, stock certificates and other evidence of ownership, securities, and many others.”)
Regarding claim(s) 10:
Cella teaches:
accessing at least one database having simulated tradable assets stored therein, wherein the simulated tradable asset includes at least one cryptocurrency; (Cella: pgh 1139, “Additional or alternative examples of external knowledge exchanges and/or databases may include stock exchanges, commodities exchanges, derivative exchanges…cryptocurrency exchanges…”)
accessing at least one third-party pricing database having pricing information associated with the simulated tradable assets; (Cella: pgh 611, “The External Data Sources can include any system or device that can provide data to the platform. Examples of data sources can include market data sources (e.g., for financial markets, commercial markets (including e-commerce), advertising markets, energy markets, telecommunication markets, and many others).”)
presenting, via the output display, at least one of a plurality of tutorials for the first user regarding electronic infrastructure associated with the simulated tradable assets, (Cella: pgh 2244, “The human training system may include one or more documents, videos, tutorials, and the like for facilitating human learning of actions and/or techniques for interfacing with the user interfaces.”)
receiving selection commands from the first user for selecting at least one of the simulated tradable assets; (Cella: pgh 2161, “The user may then initiate a transaction by selecting one or more of the transaction options.”)
engaging in a competition of managing a cost of the simulated tradable assets over a defined time period, including: (Cella: pgh 2260, “For example, points may be awarded for trading goods of a particular type and/or within a particular region. Users who have been awarded points may compete with one another…”)
calculating a buy-in cost for the first user based at least on the selection commands and the pricing information associated with the simulated tradable assets… (Cella: pgh 109, “In embodiments, the models trained by the machine learning system are utilized by the artificial intelligence system to execute simulations on the product twin for predicting the cost and/or the price of the product…Cost prediction may utilize inputs from marketplaces…”)
electronically deducting the buy-in cost from the first virtual funds; (Cella: pgh 1109, “In embodiments, such a smart contract may automatically credit or debit an account, trigger a transfer of value, or the like.”)
over the defined time period, further accessing the at least one third-party pricing database and updating the pricing information associated with the simulated tradable assets; (Cella: pgh 522, “Each of the set of intelligent forecasting engines may use data that is tracked…as well as input data from external data sources…”; pgh 550, “…the platform may include an energy price-aware coin wrapper, or expert system that uses machine learning to optimize the execution of a cryptocurrency transaction based on real time energy price information for an available energy source…An energy price-aware coin may be configured to time such operations based on energy price forecasts, such as with one or more of the intelligent forecasting engines…”)
upon further updating the pricing information, generate a costs status for the first user based on the pricing information and an ownership volume of the simulated tradable assets; (Cella: pgh 1109, “In embodiments, such a smart contract may automatically credit or debit an account, trigger a transfer of value, or the like.”)
presenting, via an output display, an option for viewing at least one of a plurality of tutorials for the first user regarding simulated tradable assets, the tutorials including information regarding pricing and related information on the simulated tradable assets; (Cella: pgh 2017, “In embodiments, automated, machine-learned strategy recognition enables further automation of marketplace strategy, including automated recommendation of trades and automated recommendation of complementary and competitive strategies.”)
upon completion of the defined time period, generating an output display including a final change in value of the virtual simulated tradable assets and any changes in the virtual funds. (Cella: pgh 2246, “The gamificaton of robotic process automation capabilities may include awarding points to users for performing tasks desirable to operation of the market orchestration system platform…For example, points may be awarded for augmentation of a robotic process automation algorithm…digital and/or physical prizes may be awarded to users who have achieved one or more point thresholds and/or have ranked above one or more other users on a points leaderboard.”)
Cella does not teach, however, Boo teaches:
engaging with a first user for determining a first wallet of virtual funds available to the first user; (Boo: pgh 22, “A digital wallet may comprise a software-based system that securely (and typically in an encrypted format) stores users’ confidential information, personal information, payment information, and/or passwords for numerous payment methods and websites.”)
wherein the electronic infrastructure associated with the simulated tradable asset includes at least one of: an electronic wallet and a blockchain data recording operation; (Boo: pgh 22, “By using a digital wallet, users can complete communications, purchases, and/or other blockchain operations…”)
…wherein the pricing information includes a gas fee; (Boo: pgh 6, “Within this context, conventional proof-of-stake consensus mechanisms rely on a first-price auction as main gas fee calculation methodology…In such cases, the users with the highest amounts will have their blockchain operations processed first (as the validators chose the blockchain operations with the highest gas fee, whin in turn became their reward).”)
adjusting the buy-in cost accounting for simulated tradable asset infrastructure costs; and (Boo: pgh 6, “In contrast to this, methods and systems described herein relate to a new gas fee calculation that may allot a dynamic ‘base fee,’ which is burned, and an additional fee that is allocated to the validator.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Cella to include the teachings of Boo for the benefit of “reducing uncertainty related to the cost of the blockchain operation” (Boo: pgh 23).
Regarding claim(s) 11:
The combination of Cella/Boo, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 10. Cella further teaches:
engaging with a plurality of other users and via user interface operations receiving input commands for the plurality of other users to select a plurality of simulated tradable assets; and (Cella: pgh 2161, “The user may then initiate a transaction by selecting one or more of the transaction options.”)
via a gaming processing engine, electronically track the plurality of users versus the first user during the defined time period. (Cella: pgh 1250, “In embodiments, converged processes may include shared data structures for multiple applications (including ones that track the same transactions on a blockchain but may consume different subsets of available attributes of the data objects maintained in the blockchain or ones that use a set of nodes and links in a common knowledge graph). For example, a transaction indicating a change of ownership of an entity may be stored in a blockchain and used by multiple applications…”)
Regarding claim(s) 12:
The combination of Cella/Boo, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 11. Cella further teaches:
based on the gaming computing device and tracking the first user and other users profit values, upon completion of the defined time period, generating at least one tutorial for display to the first user regarding how to improve the first user's profit value during the defined time period. (Cella: pgh 2217, “In embodiments, an intelligent agent may monitor the track of the actions taken while the strategy is being refined by the user so that the intelligent agent system may train the intelligent agent to generate or recommend strategies to the user in the future.”)
Regarding claim(s) 13:
The combination of Cella/Boo, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 10. Cella further teaches:
wherein the defined time period is at least one of: a predetermined time period selected from a set of time periods and a time period determined by the first user. (Cella: pgh 2262, “The digital replica may simulate the one or more potential future states of a market, a roduct, a seller, a buyer, a transaction, etc. based on simulation parameters provided by the user. Examples of simulation parameters include a progression of a period of time…”)
Regarding claim(s) 14:
The combination of Cella/Boo, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 10. Cella further teaches:
wherein the simulated tradable assets includes at least one of: a stock, a bond, a coin affiliated with a cryptocurrency, a coin unaffiliated with a cryptocurrency, property index, a media streaming value, and a commodity. (Cella: pgh 1557, “The RPA system may provide automation for one or more aspects of a custodial solution that enables automated custodial management and/or provides a recommendation or plan for a custodial activity relevant to a set of assets…such as for assets of any of the types described herein, including cryptocurrencies, and other currencies, stock certificates and other evidence of ownership, securities, and many others.”)
Regarding claim(s) 15:
Cella teaches:
for each of the plurality users, receiving selection commands for selecting one or more simulated tradable assets; (Cella: pgh 2161, “The user may then initiate a transaction by selecting one or more of the transaction options.”)
accessing at least one third-party pricing database having pricing information associated with the simulated tradable assets such that the total value of the simulated tradable assets are within the virtual funds of the wallet for each user; (Cella: pgh 611, “The External Data Sources can include any system or device that can provide data to the platform. Examples of data sources can include market data sources (e.g., for financial markets, commercial markets (including e-commerce), advertising markets, energy markets, telecommunication markets, and many others).”)
engaging in a competition of managing a cost of the simulated tradable assets over a defined time period, including: (Cella: pgh 2260, “For example, points may be awarded for trading goods of a particular type and/or within a particular region. Users who have been awarded points may compete with one another…”)
calculating a buy-in cost for each of the plurality of users based at least on the selection commands and the pricing information associated with the simulated tradable assets; (Cella: pgh 109, “In embodiments, the models trained by the machine learning system are utilized by the artificial intelligence system to execute simulations on the product twin for predicting the cost and/or the price of the product…Cost prediction may utilize inputs from marketplaces…”)
electronically deducting the buy-in cost from the virtual funds; (Cella: pgh 1109, “In embodiments, such a smart contract may automatically credit or debit an account, trigger a transfer of value, or the like.”)
over the defined time period, further accessing the at least one third-party pricing database and updating the pricing information associated with the simulated tradable assets; (Cella: pgh 522, “Each of the set of intelligent forecasting engines may use data that is tracked…as well as input data from external data sources…”; pgh 550, “…the platform may include an energy price-aware coin wrapper, or expert system that uses machine learning to optimize the execution of a cryptocurrency transaction based on real time energy price information for an available energy source…An energy price-aware coin may be configured to time such operations based on energy price forecasts, such as with one or more of the intelligent forecasting engines…”)
upon further updating the pricing information, generate a costs status for each of the users based on the pricing information and an ownership volume of the simulated tradable assets; (Cella: pgh 1109, “In embodiments, such a smart contract may automatically credit or debit an account, trigger a transfer of value, or the like.”)
presenting, via an output display, an option for viewing at least one of a plurality of tutorials regarding the simulated tradable assets, the tutorials including information regarding pricing and related information on the simulated tradable assets; (Cella: pgh 2017, “In embodiments, automated, machine-learned strategy recognition enables further automation of marketplace strategy, including automated recommendation of trades and automated recommendation of complementary and competitive strategies.”)
upon completion of the defined time period, generating an output display including a final change in value of the virtual simulated tradable assets and any changes in the virtual funds for each of the plurality of users. (Cella: pgh 2246, “The gamificaton of robotic process automation capabilities may include awarding points to users for performing tasks desirable to operation of the market orchestration system platform…For example, points may be awarded for augmentation of a robotic process automation algorithm…digital and/or physical prizes may be awarded to users who have achieved one or more point thresholds and/or have ranked above one or more other users on a points leaderboard.”)
Cella does not teach, however, Boo teaches:
determining, for each of a plurality of users, a wallet of virtual funds available for each of the plurality of users for engaging in a simulated tradable asset competition; (Boo: pgh 22, “A digital wallet may comprise a software-based system that securely (and typically in an encrypted format) stores users’ confidential information, personal information, payment information, and/or passwords for numerous payment methods and websites.”)
adjusting the buy-in cost accounting for simulated tradable asset infrastructure costs; (Boo: pgh 6, “In contrast to this, methods and systems described herein relate to a new gas fee calculation that may allot a dynamic ‘base fee,’ which is burned, and an additional fee that is allocated to the validator.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Cella to include the teachings of Boo for the benefit of “reducing uncertainty related to the cost of the blockchain operation” (Boo: pgh 23).
Regarding claim(s) 16:
The combination of Cella/Boo, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 15. Boo further teaches:
wherein the simulated tradable asset includes a cryptocurrency. (Boo: pgh 46, “…the digital wallet may comprise a repository that allows users to store, manage, and trade their cryptocurrencies and assets…”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Cella to include the teachings of Boo for the benefit of “reducing uncertainty related to the cost of the blockchain operation” (Boo: pgh 23).
Regarding claim(s) 17:
The combination of Cella/Boo, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 16. Calla further teaches:
presenting, via the output display, at least one of a plurality of tutorials regarding the electronic infrastructure associated with the simulated tradable assets. (Cella: pgh 2244, “The human training system may include one or more documents, videos, tutorials, and the like for facilitating human learning of actions and/or techniques for interfacing with the user interfaces.”)
Regarding claim(s) 18:
The combination of Cella/Boo, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 17. Boo further teaches:
wherein the electronic infrastructure associated with the simulated tradable asset includes at least one of: an electronic wallet and a blockchain data recording operation. (Boo: pgh 22, “By using a digital wallet, users can complete communications, purchases, and/or other blockchain operations…”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Cella to include the teachings of Boo for the benefit of “reducing uncertainty related to the cost of the blockchain operation” (Boo: pgh 23).
Regarding claim(s) 19:
The combination of Cella/Boo, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 17. Boo further teaches:
wherein the pricing information includes a gas fee. (Boo: pgh 6, “Within this context, conventional proof-of-stake consensus mechanisms rely on a first-price auction as main gas fee calculation methodology…In such cases, the users with the highest amounts will have their blockchain operations processed first (as the validators chose the blockchain operations with the highest gas fee, whin in turn became their reward).”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Cella to include the teachings of Boo for the benefit of “reducing uncertainty related to the cost of the blockchain operation” (Boo: pgh 23).
Regarding claim(s) 20:
The combination of Cella/Boo, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 17. Cella further teaches:
wherein the simulated tradable assets includes at least one of: a stock, a bond, a coin affiliated with a cryptocurrency, a coin unaffiliated with a cryptocurrency, property index, a media streaming value, and a commodity. (Cella: pgh 1557, “The RPA system may provide automation for one or more aspects of a custodial solution that enables automated custodial management and/or provides a recommendation or plan for a custodial activity relevant to a set of assets…such as for assets of any of the types described herein, including cryptocurrencies, and other currencies, stock certificates and other evidence of ownership, securities, and many others.”)
Conclusion
Pertinent Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure. Cella (US 2022/0198562) discloses a market orchestration system for facilitating electronic marketplace transactions.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN O PRESTON whose telephone number is (571)270-3918. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:00 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, MICHAEL ANDERSON can be reached on 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.
/JOHN O PRESTON/Examiner, Art Unit 3693
April 18, 2026
/ELIZABETH H ROSEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3693
