DETAILED ACTION
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This Office action is in response to Applicant’s communication filed on February 6, 2026. Preliminary amendments to claims 1-30 have been entered. Claims 1-30 are pending and have been examined. The rejections are stated below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
2. 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.
3. Claims 1-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
The claims recite a computer implemented system for automating raising capital with scanned asset identifiers, which is considered a judicial exception because it falls under the category of “Certain Methods of organizing human activity” such as fundamental economic practice as well as commercial or legal interactions including agreements as discussed below. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application as discussed below. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception as discussed below.
Analysis
Step 1: In the instant case, exemplary claim 1 is directed to a system.
Step 2A – Prong One: The limitations of “A computer implemented system for automating raising capital with scanned asset identifiers, the process comprising: with a computing system and a scanner in communication with the computing system, scanning into storage in the computing system an asset identifier for an asset comprising a product and/or service provided by a product or service providing entity; with the computing system, automatically storing into storage in the computing system an association between the asset and the asset identifier; and with the computing system, automatically offering for sale at least a portion of an asset identifier ownership along with at least a percentage interest in subsequent sale revenue or other value derived from the asset as applicable” as drafted, when considered collectively as an ordered combination without the italicized portions, is a process that, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, covers the category of “Certain Methods of organizing human activity” such as fundamental economic practice as well as commercial or legal interactions including agreements.
A system for automating raising capital is a fundamental economic practice. “Offering for sale at least a portion of an asset identifier ownership along with at least a percentage interest in subsequent sale revenue or other value derived from the asset as applicable” is a form of commercial or legal interaction including agreements, advertising, marketing or sales activities. (See Specification [0002] This application relates to a system and method providing to a third party an interest in one or more future product or service transactions, such as, for example, trackable product or service sales or leases, and more particularly, a system and method for providing business capital by sale of percentage interest in transactions involving identified products or services of the business seeking the capital.) Hence, the steps of the claim, considered collectively as an ordered combination without the italicized portions, covers the abstract idea category of “Certain Methods of organizing human activity”. (Claims are interpreted in light of the Specification). That is, other than, a computing system (with storage) in communication with a scanner, nothing in the claim precludes the underlying steps from being performed as a method of organizing human activity. If the claim limitations, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, covers methods/systems of organizing human activity but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Step 2A – Prong Two: The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim only recites the additional elements of a computing system (with storage) in communication with a scanner to perform all the steps. A plain reading of at least Figures 1-21 and descriptions in at least associated paragraphs [0079] – [0083] , [00120] – [00124] reveals that a system comprising a processor of a general-purpose computer suitably programmed is used execute the claimed steps. The scanner may be a generic scanner such as a barcode scanning device, a SKU scanning device, an RFID reader, or the like. Hence, the additional elements in the claims are all generic components suitably programmed to perform their respective functions. The system components in all the steps is recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as generic computer components performing generic computer functions) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Hence, claim 1 is directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, using the additional elements (identified above) to perform the claimed steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. The additional elements of the instant underlying process, when taken in combination, together do not offer substantially more than the sum of the functions of the elements when each is taken alone. Mere instructions to apply an exception using generic computer components cannot provide an inventive concept. Hence, independent claim 1 is not patent eligible.
Dependent claims 2-30, when analyzed as a whole are held to be patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the additional recited limitations only refine the abstract idea further.
For instance, in claims 2-4, the steps “wherein the offering for sale includes providing an associated contractual obligation of delivery to or for a purchaser the percentage interest of subsequent sale revenue or other derived asset value”, “further comprising: with the computing system, upon an occurrence of a sale of the at least a portion of the asset identifier, providing to the product or service providing entity at least an apportionment of the subsequent sale revenue or other value for the sale”, “further comprising: with the computing system, upon an occurrence of a sale of the at least a portion of the asset identifier, providing to the product or service providing entity at least an apportionment of the subsequent sale revenue or other value for the sale” under the broadest reasonable interpretation, are further refinements of methods of organizing human activity because these steps describe the intermediate steps of the underlying process.
In claims 5-9, the step “where the physical code identification includes a barcode or an SKU” under the broadest reasonable interpretation, is a further refinement of methods of organizing human activity because this step describes the information used in the intermediate step of the underlying process.
In claims 10-14, the step “wherein a non-fungible token comprises the at least a portion of the asset identifier ownership along with at least a percentage interest in subsequent sale revenue or other derived asset value as applicable” under the broadest reasonable interpretation, is a further refinement of methods of organizing human activity because this step describes the information used in the intermediate step of the underlying process.
In claims 15-19, the step “wherein a blockchain cryptographic system stores the at least a portion of the asset identifier ownership along with at least a percentage interest in subsequent sale revenue or other value derived from the asset as applicable” under the broadest reasonable interpretation, is a further refinement of methods of organizing human activity because this step describes the information used in the intermediate step of the underlying process.
In claim 20, the step “wherein a blockchain cryptographic system stores a contractual obligation in the at least a portion of the asset identifier ownership along with at least a percentage interest in subsequent sale revenue or other value derived from the asset as applicable” under the broadest reasonable interpretation, is a further refinement of methods of organizing human activity because this step describes the information used and also an intermediate step of the underlying process.
In claims 21-30, the step “also including publishing to a data stream or data feed a rate of return to the product or service providing entity for the at least an apportionment of the sale revenue or other value for the sale” under the broadest reasonable interpretation, is a further refinement of methods of organizing human activity because this step further describes an intermediate step of the underlying process.
In all the dependent claims, the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the limitations are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Also, the claims do not affect an improvement to another technology or technical field; the claims do not amount to an improvement to the functioning of a computer system itself; the claims do not affect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing; and the claims do not move beyond a general link of the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment. In addition, the dependent claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The additional elements of the instant underlying process, when taken in combination, together do not offer substantially more than the sum of the functions of the elements when each is taken alone. The claims as a whole, do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. For these reasons, the dependent claims also are not patent eligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
4. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
5. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b) (2) (C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a) (2) prior art against the later invention.
6. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
7. Claim(s) 1-9 and 15-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Tran et al. (US Pub. 2017/0232300 A1) (hereinafter “Tran”).
Regarding claim 1, Tran discloses a computer implemented process for automating raising capital with scanned asset identifiers, the process comprising: with a computing system and a scanner in communication with the computing system, scanning into storage in the computing system an asset identifier for an asset comprising a product and/or service provided by a product or service providing entity (Upon receipt by a bar code scanner or an NFC scanner, the product authenticity can be verified. The product may combine other anti-counterfeiting measures with the first code such as a holographic icon or a special tamperproof case/housing, for example, para [0305]); with the computing system, automatically storing into storage in the computing system an association between the asset and the asset identifier (Digital assets can be uniquely identified by digital fingerprints using cryptographically-safe hash functions, para [0317]); and with the computing system, automatically offering for sale at least a portion of an asset identifier ownership along with at least a percentage interest in subsequent sale revenue or other value derived from the asset as applicable (In commercial terms, apart from royalties for each machine a CMS is Installed on, the validation signature for a package represents the moment that a package becomes ‘official’ and offers revenue-earning opportunities, para [0713]).
Regarding claim 2, Tran discloses wherein the offering for sale includes providing an associated contractual obligation of delivery to or for a purchaser the percentage interest of subsequent sale revenue or other derived asset value (The tree based algorithm finds the top variable which divides the borrowers Into segments with similar percentage of “promising” and "troubled.", para [0896]).
Regarding claim 3, Tran discloses with the computing system, upon an occurrence of a sale of the at least a portion of the asset identifier, providing to the product or service providing entity at least an apportionment of the subsequent sale revenue or other value for the sale (In commercial terms, apart from royalties for each machine a CMS is installed on, the validation signature for a package represents the moment that a package becomes ‘official’ and offers revenue-earning opportunities, para [0713]).
Regarding claim 4, Tran discloses with the computing system, upon an occurrence of a sale of the at least a portion of the asset identifier, providing to the product or service providing entity at least an apportionment of the subsequent sale revenue or other value for the sale (In commercial terms, apart from royalties for each machine a CMS is installed on, the validation signature for a package represents the moment that a package becomes ‘official’ and offers revenue-earning opportunities, para [0713]).
Regarding claim 5, Tran discloses where the asset identifier includes a barcode or an SKU (In this embodiment, the private key (134) is embedded in the media item (112), which is an e-book, as a one-dimensional barcode (113), para [0148], Fig. 13E).
Regarding claim 6, Tran discloses where the asset identifier includes a barcode or an SKU (in this embodiment, the private key (134) is embedded in the media item (112), which is an e-book, as a one-dimensional barcode (113), para [0148], Fig. 13E).
Regarding claim 7, Tran discloses where the asset identifier includes a barcode or an SKU (In this embodiment, the private key (134) is embedded in the media item (112), which is an e-book, as a one-dimensional barcode (113), para [0148], Fig. 13E).
Regarding claim 8, Tran discloses where the asset identifier includes a barcode or an SKU (In this embodiment, the private key (134) is embedded in the media item (112), which is an e-book, as a one-dimensional barcode (113), para [0148], Fig. 13E).
Regarding claim 9, Tran discloses where the asset identifier includes a barcode or an SKU (In this embodiment, the private key (134) is embedded in the media Item (112), which is an e-book, as a one-dimensional barcode (113), para [0148], Fig. 13E).
Regarding claim 15, Tran discloses wherein a blockchain cryptographic system stores the at least a portion of the asset identifier ownership along with at least a percentage interest in subsequent sale revenue or other value derived from the asset as applicable (Blockchain token ownership is immediately transferred to a new owner after authentication and verification, which are based on network ledgers within a peer-to-peer network, guaranteeing nearly Instantaneous execution and settlement, para [0119]).
Regarding claim 16, Tran discloses wherein a blockchain cryptographic system stores the contractual obligation along with the at least a portion of the asset identifier ownership along with at least a percentage interest in subsequent sale revenue or other value derived from the asset as applicable (Blockchain token ownership is immediately transferred to a new owner after authentication and verification, which are based on network ledgers within a peer-to-peer network, guaranteeing nearly instantaneous execution and settlement, para [0119]).
Regarding claim 17, Tran discloses wherein a blockchain cryptographic system stores the contractual obligation in the at least a portion of the asset identifier ownership along with at least a percentage interest in subsequent sale revenue or other value derived from the asset as applicable (Blockchain token ownership is immediately transferred to a new owner after authentication and verification, which are based on network ledgers within a peer-to-peer network, guaranteeing nearly instantaneous execution and settlement, para [0119]).
Regarding claim 18, Tran discloses wherein a blockchain cryptographic system stores the at least a portion of the asset identifier ownership along with at least a percentage interest in subsequent sale revenue or other value derived from the asset as applicable (Blockchain token ownership is immediately transferred to a new owner after authentication and verification, which are based on network ledgers within a peer-to-peer network, guaranteeing nearly instantaneous execution and settlement, para [0119]).
Regarding claim 19, Tran discloses wherein a blockchain cryptographic system stores the at least a portion of the asset identifier ownership along with at least a percentage interest in subsequent sale revenue or other value derived from the asset as applicable (Blockchain token ownership is immediately transferred to a new owner after authentication and verification, which are based on network ledgers within a peer-to-peer network, guaranteeing nearly instantaneous execution and settlement, para [0119]).
Regarding claim 20, Tran discloses wherein a blockchain cryptographic system stores a contractual obligation in the at least a portion of the asset identifier ownership along with at least a percentage interest in subsequent sale revenue or other value derived from the asset as applicable (The underwriting criteria may require an applicant to have a history of making a given number of timely payments on a financial obligation, and this criteria may be met by the payments that the applicant is required to make to the RCA, para [0905]).
Regarding claims 21 - 30, Tran discloses a computer implemented process for automating raising capital of claims 3, 4, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 15, 16 and 20 also including publishing to a data stream or data feed a rate of return to the product or service providing entity for the at least an apportionment of the sale revenue or other value for the sale (A method for using augmented reality, the method comprising: receiving, by a computerized device, a data stream with a 360 degree view of a live event on each participant, wherein the data stream comprises live video augmented with positions of team mates and opposing players and recommends a play routine based on live field condition and positions of other players, wherein the user can select a point of view from a selected participant, para [1015]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
8. 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 of this title, 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.
9. Claims 10-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tran et al. (US Pub. 2017/0232300 A1) in view of Koch, Rudy (US Pub. 2022/0036456 A1) (hereinafter "Koch").
Regarding claim 10, Tran discloses a computer implemented system for automating raising capital of claim 1, yet fails to disclose wherein a non-fungible token comprises the at least a portion of the asset identifier ownership along with at least a percentage interest in subsequent sale revenue or other derived asset value as applicable.
Koch discloses wherein a non-fungible token comprises the at least a portion of the asset identifier ownership along with at least a percentage interest in subsequent sale revenue or other derived asset value as applicable (In some implementations, system 100 may be configured to control an automated electronic networked central clearinghouse 115 for clearing and reversing reversible exchanges of digital assets, including but not limited to digital assets that are not fungible, para [0013], Fig. 1 ).
Since both references teach digital asset transfers, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the scanner of Tran with the non-fungible tokens of Koch since such a combination would provide a universal ledger for assets.
Regarding claim 11, Tran discloses a computer implemented system for automating raising capital of claim 2, yet fails to disclose wherein a non-fungible token comprises the at least a portion of the asset identifier ownership along with at least a percentage interest in subsequent sale revenue or other value derived from the asset as applicable.
Koch discloses wherein a non-fungible token comprises the al least a portion of the asset identifier ownership along with at least a percentage interest in subsequent sale revenue or other value derived from the asset as applicable (In some implementations, system 100 may be configured to control an automated electronic networked central clearinghouse 115 for clearing and reversing reversible exchanges of digital assets, including but not limited to digital assets that are not fungible, para [0013), Fig. 1).
Since both references teach digital asset transfers, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the scanner of Tran with the non-fungible tokens of Koch since such a combination would provide a universal ledger for assets.
Regarding claim 12, Tran discloses a computer implemented system for automating raising capital of claim 4, yet fails to disclose wherein a non-fungible token comprises the at least a portion of the asset identifier ownership along with at least a percentage interest in subsequent sale revenue or other value derived from the asset as applicable.
Koch discloses wherein a non-fungible token comprises the at least a portion of the asset identifier ownership along with at least a percentage interest in subsequent sale revenue or other value derived from the asset as applicable (In some implementations, system 100 may be configured to control an automated electronic networked central clearinghouse 115 for clearing and reversing reversible exchanges of digital assets, including but not limited to digital assets that are not fungible, para [0013], Fig. 1 ).
Since both references teach digital asset transfers, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the scanner of Tran with the non-fungible tokens of Koch since such a combination would provide a universal ledger for assets.
Regarding claim 13, Tran discloses a computer implemented system for automating raising capital of claim 5, yet fails to disclose wherein a non-fungible token comprises the at least a portion of the asset identifier ownership along with at least a percentage interest in subsequent sale revenue or other value derived from the asset as applicable.
Koch discloses wherein a non-fungible token comprises the at least a portion of the asset identifier ownership along with at least a percentage interest in subsequent sale revenue or other value derived from the asset as applicable (In some implementations, system 100 may be configured to control an automated electronic networked central clearinghouse 115 for clearing and reversing reversible exchanges of digital assets, including but not limited to digital assets that are not fungible, para [0013]. Fig. 1).
Since both references teach digital asset transfers, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the scanner of Tran with the non-fungible tokens of Koch since such a combination would provide a universal ledger for assets.
Regarding claim 14, Tran discloses a computer implemented system for automating raising capital of claim 9, yet fails to disclose wherein a non-fungible token comprises the al least a portion of the asset identifier ownership along with at least a percentage interest in subsequent sale revenue or other value derived from the asset as applicable.
Koch discloses wherein a non-fungible token comprises the at least a portion of the asset identifier ownership along with at least a percentage interest in subsequent sale revenue or other value derived from the asset as applicable (In some implementations, system 100 may be configured to control an automated electronic networked central clearinghouse 115 for clearing and reversing reversible exchanges of digital assets, including but not limited to digital assets that are not fungible, para [0013], Fig. 1).
Since both references teach digital asset transfers, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the scanner of Tran with the non-fungible tokens of Koch since such a combination would provide a universal ledger for assets.
Conclusion
10. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
(a) Jerram et al. (US Pub. 2012/0330874 A1) discloses Apparatuses, Methods and Systems for a Digital Conversation Management Platform ("DCM-Platform") that transforms digital dialogue from consumers, client demands and, Internet search inputs via DCM-Platform components into tradable digital assets, and client needs based artificial intelligence campaign plan outputs. In one implementation, The DCM-Platform may capture and examine conversations between individuals and artificial intelligence conversation agents. These agents may be viewed as assets. One can measure the value and performance of these agents by assessing their performance and ability to generate revenue from prolonging conversations and/or ability to effect sales through conversations with individuals.
(b) Wright et al. (US Pub. 2021/0090076 A1) discloses an invention relating to the fields of tokenization, blockchain and smart contract technologies. It provides a technical arrangement which simplifies the automated management of contracts. The invention comprises a method and system which use a computer-based repository for storage of the contract. The contract is then represented by a transaction on the blockchain. Metadata within the transaction's script includes a hash of the contract and a means of identifying its location within the repository. The transaction also includes an unspent output (UTXO) which indicates its status as an open (i.e. not terminated) contract. The contract is terminated by spending the output at a later point in time, for example, using nLockTime+CheckLockTimeVerify (CLTV). By combining this concept with other techniques and computing components, the invention can provide a powerful mechanism for implementing various tasks such as renewing or rolling over the contract, or dividing it into sub-contracts or conditions. Furthermore, as the status and existence of the contract is evidence via the blockchain, this provides a permanent, publicly visible and non-alterable record of the contract.
11. 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to Narayanswamy Subramanian whose telephone number is (571) 272-6751. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday from 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Abhishek Vyas can be reached at (571) 270-1836. The fax number for Formal or Official faxes and Draft to the Patent Office 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.
/Narayanswamy Subramanian/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3691
March 17, 2026
Prosecution Insights