DETAILED ACTION
Acknowledgements
Claims 1-22 are pending.
Claims 1-22 have been examined.
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 Rejections - 35 USC §101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Analysis
In the instant case, claims 1-11 are directed to a method, claims 12-22 are directed to a system. Therefore, these claims fall within the four statutory categories of invention.
The claim(s) recite(s) providing token service. Specifically, the claims recite “receiving, by a [receiver of a processing server within a network system], a request including at least permission data and an identification value from a first [computing system], wherein the identification value is associated with a first [blockchain] wallet for a [blockchain] associated with a [blockchain network]; generating, by a [processor of the processing server within the network system], (1) a permission token based on at least the permission data and (2) an alias, wherein the permission token includes one or more verified identity data points; transmitting, by a [transmitter of the processing server within the network system], the generated alias to the first [computing system] in response to the received request; receiving, by the [receiver of the processing server], a token request from a second [computing system], wherein the token request includes the alias; and transmitting, by the [transmitter of the processing server], at least the generated permission token and the identification value to the second [computing system] in response to the received token request.”, which is “commercial or legal interactions” within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas in prong one of step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test (See MPEP 2106) because the claims involve a series of steps for providing token service. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because, when analyzed under prong two of step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test (See MPEP 2106), the additional element(s) of the claim(s) such as the use of processing server, network system, computing system, blockchain, blockchain network, receiver of the processing server, processor of the processing server and transmitter of the processing server merely use(s) a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. The computing systems are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic computer performing a generic computer function of providing token service) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer components. Accordingly, the additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and the claims are directed to an abstract idea.
The claims do 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, the additional element of using processing server, network system, computing system, blockchain, blockchain network, receiver of the processing server, processor of the processing server and transmitter of the processing server to provide token service steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer components cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible.
Dependent claims 2 and 13 describe identification value. Dependent claims 3 and 14 describe verified identity data points. Dependent claims 4, 11, 15 and 22 describe request. Dependent claims 5 and 16 describe new blockchain transaction generation. Dependent claims 6 and 17 describe transmitting newly generated blockchain transaction. Dependent claims 7 and 18 describe verifying compliance of the first blockchain wallet. Dependent claims 8 and 19 describe permission token. Dependent claims 9 and 20 describe linking alias to blockchain wallets. Dependent claims 10 and 21 describe first and second computer system. These claims further recite the abstract idea of certain methods of organizing human activity. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional element(s) of the claim(s) such as the use of processing server, network system, computing system, blockchain, blockchain network, receiver of the processing server, processor of the processing server and transmitter of the processing server merely use(s) a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claims are not patent eligible.
Viewed as a whole, the combination of elements recited in the claims simply recite the concept of providing token service5. The claims do not, for example, purport to improve the functioning of the computer itself. Nor do they effect an improvement in any other technology or technical field.
The use of a processing server, network system, computing system, blockchain, blockchain network, receiver of the processing server, processor of the processing server and transmitter of the processing server as tools to implement the abstract idea does not render the claim patent eligible because it does not provide meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment and requires no more than a computer performing functions that correspond to acts required to carry out the 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.
Claims 1-2, 4, 11-13, 15 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Application Publication US20030028481A1 (“Flitcroft et al.”) in view of US Grant Publication US11257078B2 (“Mittal et al.”).
Regarding claims 1 and 12, Flitcroft et al. discloses:
receiving, by a receiver of a processing server within a network system, a request including at least permission data and an identification value from a first computing system, (¶¶0231–232, ¶0238 and ¶0240)
generating, by a processor of the processing server within the network system,
a permission token based on at least the permission data and (¶¶0232–233)
an alias, (¶¶0232–233)
wherein the permission token includes one or more verified identity data points; (¶¶0232–233)
transmitting, by a transmitter of the processing server within the network system, the generated alias to the first computing system in response to the received request; (¶¶0231-232)
receiving, by the receiver of the processing server, a token request from a second computing system, wherein the token request includes the alias; and (¶0240)
transmitting, by the transmitter of the processing server, at least the generated permission token and the identification value to the second computing system in response to the received token request. (¶0240)
Flitcroft et al. does not explicitly disclose:
a blockchain network;
wherein the identification value is associated with a first blockchain wallet for a blockchain associated with a blockchain network;
However, Mittal et al. discloses:
a blockchain network; (Fig. 1 items 112)
wherein the identification value is associated with a first blockchain wallet for a blockchain associated with a blockchain network; (col 8 lines 58-63)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Credit Card System and Method of Flitcroft et al. by including a blockchain network and wallet in accordance with the teaching of Mittal et al.. This modification enables the combined system to support blockchain transactions. Therefore, the system can take advantage of blockchain technology has to offer, such as providing transactions with enhanced security, immutability, accessibility and transparency.
Regarding claims 2 and 13, Flitcroft et al. in view of Mittal et al. discloses all limitations as described above. Mittal et al. further discloses:
wherein the identification value is a public key associated with the first blockchain wallet (col 8 lines 1–3, 13–18 and 58-63)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Credit Card System and Method of Flitcroft et al. by including a blockchain wallet in accordance with the teaching of Mittal et al.. This modification enables the combined system to support blockchain transactions. Therefore, the system can take advantage of blockchain technology has to offer, such as providing transactions with enhanced security, immutability, accessibility and transparency.
Regarding claims 4 and 15, Flitcroft et al. in view of Mittal et al. discloses all limitations as described above. Flitcroft et al. further discloses:
wherein the request received from the first computing system is devoid of personally identifiable information (PII). (¶¶0232-233)
Regarding claims 11 and 22, Flitcroft et al. in view of Mittal et al. discloses all limitations as described above. Flitcroft et al. further discloses:
wherein the request is an onboarding request. (¶0231)
Claims 3, 7-8, 14 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Application Publication US20030028481A1 (“Flitcroft et al.”) in view of US Grant Publication US11257078B2 (“Mittal et al.”), and in further view of US Application Publication US20200213118A9 (“Sundaresan”).
Regarding claims 3 and 14, Flitcroft et al. in view of Mittal et al. discloses all limitations as described above. Flitcroft et al. and Mittal et al. do not explicitly disclose:
wherein the one or more verified identity data points include at least one of a geographic location, an age, an income, an identity verification status, and a compliance status.
However, Sundaresan discloses:
wherein the one or more verified identity data points include at least one of a geographic location, an age, an income, an identity verification status, and a compliance status. (¶0044)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combined system of Flitcroft et al. and Mittal et al. by including a geographic location, an age, an income, an identity verification status, or a compliance status in the verified identity data in accordance with the teaching of Sundaresan. This modification enables the combined system to verify one’s identity in multiple and diverse ways, such as geolocation, age verification, etc.. This comprehensive approach enhances security and improves the robustness of the system.
Regarding claims 7 and 18, Flitcroft et al. in view of Mittal et al. discloses all limitations as described above. Flitcroft et al. and Mittal et al. do not explicitly disclose:
verifying, by the second computing system, compliance of the first blockchain wallet with one or more applicable regulations based on the one or more verified identity data points included in the received permission token prior to generating the new blockchain transaction.
However, Sundaresan discloses:
verifying, by the second computing system, compliance of the first blockchain wallet with one or more applicable regulations based on the one or more verified identity data points included in the received permission token prior to generating the new blockchain transaction. (¶0037 and ¶0047)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combined system of Flitcroft et al. and Mittal et al. by including verifying compliance of the first wallet based on identity data included in the permission token in accordance with the teaching of Sundaresan. This modification enables the combined system to verify wallet compliance in related to the permission token.
Regarding claims 8 and 19, Flitcroft et al. in view of Mittal et al. discloses all limitations as described above. Flitcroft et al. and Mittal et al. do not explicitly disclose:
wherein the permission token is a digital token that includes the one or more verified identity data points in a standardized format that includes fields for all identity attributes.
However, Sundaresan discloses:
wherein the permission token is a digital token that includes the one or more verified identity data points in a standardized format that includes fields for all identity attributes.(¶0047)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combined system of Flitcroft et al. and Mittal et al. by including verified identity data in the permission token in accordance with the teaching of Sundaresan. This modification enables the combined system to verify identity in related to the permission token.
Claims 5-6 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Application Publication US20030028481A1 (“Flitcroft et al.”) in view of US Grant Publication US11257078B2 (“Mittal et al.”), and in further view of US Application Publication US20200334738A1 (“Dixit et al.”).
Regarding claims 5 and 16, Flitcroft et al. in view of Mittal et al. discloses all limitations as described above. Mittal et al. further discloses:
generating, by the second computing system within the network system, a new blockchain transaction (col 7 lines 14–63 and col 8 lines 9–18);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Credit Card System and Method of Flitcroft et al. by including generating blockchain transaction in accordance with the teaching of Mittal et al.. This modification enables the combined system to support blockchain transactions. Therefore, the system can take advantage of blockchain technology has to offer, such as providing transactions with enhanced security, immutability, accessibility and transparency.
Flitcroft et al. and Mittal et al. do not explicitly disclose:
wherein the new blockchain transaction that includes at least a transaction amount, an unspent transaction output and one of the identification value and a destination address generating using the identification value.
However, Dixit et al. discloses:
wherein the new blockchain transaction that includes at least a transaction amount, an unspent transaction output and one of the identification value and a destination address generating using the identification value. (¶0020)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combined system of Flitcroft et al. and Mittal et al. by including transaction amount, UTXO, identification value, and destination address in the blockchain transaction in accordance with the teaching of Dixit et al.. This modification enables the combined system to support cryptocurrency transaction.
Regarding claims 6 and 17, Flitcroft et al. in view of Mittal et al., and in further view of Dixit et al. discloses all limitations as described above. Mittal et al., further discloses:
transmitting, by the second computing system, the generated new blockchain transaction to a blockchain node in the blockchain network. (col 8 lines 9–18 and col 13 lines 43-47)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Credit Card System and Method of Flitcroft et al. by including a transmitting blockchain transaction in accordance with the teaching of Mittal et al.. This modification enables the combined system to support blockchain transactions. Therefore, the system can take advantage of blockchain technology has to offer, such as providing transactions with enhanced security, immutability, accessibility and transparency.
Claims 9 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Application Publication US20030028481A1 (“Flitcroft et al.”) in view of US Grant Publication US11257078B2 (“Mittal et al.”), and in further view of WO2024122243A1 (“Sony Group Corp.”).
Regarding claims 9 and 20, Flitcroft et al. in view of Mittal et al. discloses all limitations as described above. Flitcroft et al. and Mittal et al. do not explicitly disclose:
linking, by the processing server, the alias across a plurality of different blockchain wallets managed by different respective computing systems.
However, Sony Group Corp. discloses:
linking, by the processing server, the alias across a plurality of different blockchain wallets managed by different respective computing systems. (page 2, 4th para from the bottom; page 16, the 1st para)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combined system of Flitcroft et al. and Mittal et al. by including linking multiple wallets of a user by the user alias in accordance with the teaching of Sony Group Corp.. This modification enables the user to select any of the multiple wallets to use. It improves the user experience.
Claims 10 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Application Publication US20030028481A1 (“Flitcroft et al.”) in view of US Grant Publication US11257078B2 (“Mittal et al.”), and in further view of US Application Publication US20230060447A1 (“Jayakumar et al.”).
Regarding claims 10 and 21, Flitcroft et al. in view of Mittal et al. discloses all limitations as described above. Flitcroft et al. and Mittal et al. do not explicitly disclose:
wherein the first computing system is a first virtual asset service provider and the second computing system is a second virtual asset service provider, wherein the first virtual asset service provider and the second virtual asset service provider interact directly with blockchain nodes on behalf of participants to provide value added services and security.
However, Jayakumar et al. discloses:
wherein the first computing system is a first virtual asset service provider and the second computing system is a second virtual asset service provider, wherein the first virtual asset service provider and the second virtual asset service provider interact directly with blockchain nodes on behalf of participants to provide value added services and security. (Fig. 2A, items 201, 205a, 202, 205b and 203; ¶0078)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combined system of Flitcroft et al. and Mittal et al. by including a first VASP and second VASP that interact directly with blockchain on behalf of participants to provide value added services and security in accordance with the teaching of Jayakumar et al.. This modification enables the combined system to support blockchain transactions.
Conclusion
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US20190222422A1 (“Purves”) discloses A blockchain based alias directory may be utilized. Encrypted lists of aliases may be stored on the blockchain and may be accessible to network computers and secure gateways. Embodiments are directed to secure gateways and user devices for accessing the alias directory stored in the blockchain during a financial transaction. The user device may be provided with a list of aliases from which a user may select a payment account. Upon selection the user may be redirected to an identity verification system of the associated payment network.
US20230033361A1(“Mitra et al.”) discloses a method for facilitating benefit disbursements through the use of tokens and blockchain includes: receiving beneficiary information from a first computing system, the beneficiary information including a beneficiary identifier; storing a blockchain data entry, the blockchain data entry including a disbursement token associated with the beneficiary information and a recipient value generated using a public key of a cryptographic key pair; receiving a redemption message from a second computing system, the redemption message including the disbursement token, a digital signature generated using a private key of the cryptographic key pair, transaction account data, and a redemption amount; validating the digital signature using the public key of the cryptographic key pair; and transmitting a transfer message to the first computing system, the transfer message including the transaction account data and the redemption amount.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YINGYING ZHOU whose telephone number is (571)272-5308. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:00am - 5:00pm ET.
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, John W Hayes can be reached on 571-272-6708. 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.
/YINGYING ZHOU/Examiner, Art Unit 3697