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 .
This communication is a Non-Final Office Action.
Claims 1-9 have been examined in this application.
The information disclosure statement (IDS) filed on March 7, 2025 has been considered.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-9 are objected to because of the following informalities: The claims include multiple conditional language limitations, which do not have to occur since the claims are directed to a method. The claims should be amended to clearly capture how the main entity carries out each function positively while removing outside scope language and conditional limitations.
Claim 1 recites: “wherein the data interaction backing computing entity is associated with the data interaction computing entity.” It’s not clear what this limitation is meant to capture because it recites that the same entity is associated with itself. Furthermore, the claims are directed to a method, therefore, such wherein clause is non-functional descriptive material and thus has no patentable weight.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Per claim 1, the claim recites: “…managing, by the data interaction backing account, the system digital assets…” it is not known how a data interaction backing account can perform any action not alone the management of the system digital assets. An account is not a device, it is a place that holds funds or data related to a person. The Specification does not define the account as being some device capable of carrying out the claimed limitation. As a result, the claim and all dependent claims are rejected under the same rational and for mere dependence on the rejected claim.
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 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claims 1-9 fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter (process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter).
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea of managing assets without significantly more.
The abstract idea is categorized under certain methods of organizing human activity, including commercial or legal interactions including agreements in the form of contracts, sales activities or behaviors and business relations. the abstract idea is further characterized under mental processes carried out using pen and paper and including observation, evaluation, judgement, and opinion. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the claims are directed to facilitating an exchange of data between entities, providing assets to an entity from another entity and managing the digital assets; at best. The claimed scope is clearly abstract, which can be carried out by a human mind. A human can act as an intermediary between two people, facilitate a transaction between them, provide assets from one of the two people to the other of the two people, and manage or monitor how the asset is utilized. This concept/scope can further be carried out using pen and paper to connect people, provide an asset and utilize paper to keep track of the usage of the asset. The above described steps further describe the certain methods of organization human activity abstract idea as the claimed scope clearly captures business relations and interactions by connecting entities, providing an asset, and managing it.
Claim 1, in pertinent part, recites:
A method executed by a system… asset-backed data interaction system, the method comprises:
facilitating, by a… entity of the system… asset-backed data interaction system, a data interaction between a first… entity of the system… asset- based data interaction system and a second… entity of the system… asset-based data interaction system, wherein the data interaction includes the first… entity providing data to the second… entity, and wherein the facilitating the data interaction includes executing a real-time data interaction process and a nonreal-time data interaction process;
providing, by one or more staking… entities of the system… asset-backed data interaction system, system… assets to a data interaction backing account of a plurality of data interaction backing accounts of a data interaction backing… entity of the system… asset-backed data interaction system to back the data interaction; and
managing, by the data interaction backing account, the system… assets in accordance with the real-time data interaction process and the nonreal-time data interaction process…
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claims recite the following additional elements: digital assets, a data interaction computing entity, a first and a second computing entity, one or more staking computing entities, a data interaction backing computing entity. The additional elements are recited at a high level of generality, wherein the claims merely amount to an abstract idea that is implemented using generic computers, performing generic computer functions such as establishing a connection or data interaction, sending data, and analyzing or monitoring the data. Each of the additional elements / limitations are no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components or a generic device. Accordingly, even in combination, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
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 elements amount to merely instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. The claim limitations do not improve another technology or technical field, improve the functioning of a computer itself, apply the abstract idea with, or by use of, a particular machine (not a generic computer, not adding the words "apply it" or words equivalent to "apply the abstract idea", not mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, adding insignificant extra solution activity to the judicial exception, generally linking the user of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use), effects a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, or adds meaningful limitations that amount to more than generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Mere instructions to apply an exception using generic computer components cannot provide an inventive concept.
The dependent claims do not include additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or that provide significantly more than the abstract idea. The dependent claims fail to recite additional elements that would amount to a practical application or amount to significantly more than the judicial exception as discussed above. The dependent claims further describe the abstract idea.
The claims are not patent eligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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.
Claims 1-2, and 5-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication 2017/0103385 to Wilson Jr. et al. (Wilson).
Wilson teaches all of the following limitations:
A method executed by a system digital asset-backed data interaction system, the method comprises (method of transferring assets via a blockchain network) [Abstract and Figure 1]:
facilitating, by a data interaction computing entity of the system digital asset-backed data interaction system, a data interaction between a first computing entity of the system digital asset- based data interaction system and a second computing entity of the system digital asset-based data interaction system, wherein the data interaction includes the first computing entity providing data to the second computing entity, and wherein the facilitating the data interaction includes executing a real-time data interaction process and a nonreal-time data interaction process (the blockchain network facilitates the transfer of assets between devices; a settlement platform may operate electronically as a digital asset intermediary electronic settlement platform. Both transaction timestamping and block timestamping are utilized to transfer assets) [Paragraphs 0037-0046, and 0059-0061],
Examiner notes that the limitation “wherein the data interaction includes the first computing entity providing data to the second computing entity, and wherein the facilitating the data interaction includes executing a real-time data interaction process and a nonreal-time data interaction process” amounts to non-functional descriptive material, which has no patentable weight. The limitation is interpreted as being directed to a method step of solely facilitating a data interaction between entities. The other limitations at issue are directed to what other entities do and further an execution of a process that is not positively recited as being part of the facilitation of the data interaction between entities.
providing, by one or more staking computing entities of the system digital asset-backed data interaction system, system digital assets to a data interaction backing account of a plurality of data interaction backing accounts of a data interaction backing computing entity of the system digital asset-backed data interaction system to back the data interaction (exchanging of currency for the asset) [Paragraphs 0005-0006, 0063, 0108, and 0111]; and
managing, by the data interaction backing account, the system digital assets in accordance with the real-time data interaction process and the nonreal-time data interaction process, wherein the data interaction backing computing entity is associated with the data interaction computing entity (insuring usage rights of the asset according to conditions) [Paragraphs 0005-0006, 0064, 0066 and 0071].
Per claim 2, Wilson teaches wherein the executing the real-time data interaction process comprises: obtaining, by the data interaction computing entity, first computing entity real-time information and second computing entity real-time information; instructing, by the data interaction computing entity, the data interaction backing computing entity to lock an amount of the system digital assets for the data interaction; obtaining, by the data interaction computing entity, the data from the first computing entity; and providing, by the data interaction computing entity, the data to the second computing entity [Paragraphs 0042, 0068, 0097-0100, and 0118].
Per claim 5, Wilson teaches wherein the executing the nonreal-time data interaction process comprises: connecting, by the data interaction computing entity, to a plurality consensus network computing entities associated with a distributed ledger technology, wherein the plurality of consensus network computing entities performs a verification process to verify the data interaction; when the verification process is successful: determining, by the data interaction computing entity, that the data interaction is successful; and instructing, by the data interaction computing entity, the data interaction backing computing entity to unlock the amount of system digital assets; and when the verification process is unsuccessful: determining, by the data interaction computing entity, that the data interaction is unsuccessful; and instructing, by the data interaction computing entity, the data interaction backing computing entity to facilitate a consume instruction of the amount of system digital assets [Paragraphs 0042, 0068, 0097-0100, and 0118].
Claim 5 contains conditional limitations which do not have to occur, thus have no patentable weight.
Per claim 6, Wilson teaches wherein the data is a digital asset, and wherein the distributed ledger technology is a digital asset blockchain associated with the digital asset; and wherein data interaction terms regarding the data interaction are maintained by a data interaction smart contract, and the distributed ledger technology is a data interaction smart contract blockchain associated with the smart contract [Paragraphs 0008, 0058-0060].
Per claim 7, Wilson teaches wherein the executing the real-time data interaction process further comprises: determining, by the data interaction computing entity, data interaction terms based on the first and second computing entity real-time information and a type of the data interaction [Paragraphs 0005-0006, 0064, 0066 and 0071].
Per claim 8, Wilson teaches wherein the type of the data interaction includes one of: a digital asset-based payment, wherein the first computing entity provides a digital asset and the second computing entity accepts a desired asset; a loan agreement; a contract; and sending confidential data [Paragraphs 0060-0061].
Per claim 9, Wilson teaches wherein the data interaction terms include one or more of: a time frame; a performance requirement; an acknowledgment; and an action [Paragraphs 0096-0104].
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 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilson, as applied above in claims 1-2, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 2022/0159334 to Wang et al. (Wang).
Per claim 3, Wilson does not explicitly disclose wherein the executing the real-time data interaction process further comprises: obtaining, by the data interaction computing entity, the data from the first computing entity; converting, by the data interaction computing entity, the data to second data, wherein the data includes a first data format and the second data includes a second data format, and wherein the second data format is preferred by the second computing entity; and providing, by the data interaction computing entity, the second data to the second computing entity.
Wang teaches wherein the executing the real-time data interaction process further comprises: obtaining, by the data interaction computing entity, the data from the first computing entity; converting, by the data interaction computing entity, the data to second data, wherein the data includes a first data format and the second data includes a second data format, and wherein the second data format is preferred by the second computing entity; and providing, by the data interaction computing entity, the second data to the second computing entity [Paragraphs 0021-0023, 0166-0173].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the teachings of Wilson, which teaches transferring of digital assets between entities, to include the teachings of Wang, which teaches converting the format of the digital asset in motivation of enhancing the usage of the asset by the receiving entity.
Per claim 4, Wilson teaches wherein the converting the data to the second data comprises: when the data is a digital asset: connecting to one or more digital asset exchange entities to exchange the digital asset to a substantially equivalent amount of a desired asset, wherein the desired asset is the second data [Paragraphs 0062 and 0090-0091].
Examiner notes that claim 4 contains conditional language, rendering the limitation of claim 4 as optional and therefore not having to occur.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure is listed on for PTO-892.
References deemed pertinent to the claimed scope include U.S. Patent 11,909,860 to So et al. So teaches depositing, holding and/or distributing collateral in the form of a stable value token for a security token, the tokens being on the same underlying blockchain. Furthermore, the present invention relates to methods, systems and program products for lending digital assets, such as crypto currency, and related products.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EL MEHDI OUSSIR whose telephone number is (571)270-0191. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM - 5PM.
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, Neha W. Patel can be reached on 571-270-1492. 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.
Sincerely,
/EL MEHDI OUSSIR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3699