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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on June 10, 2026 has been entered. Applicant has amended claims 8 and 19. Applicant has cancelled claims 1-7. Claims 8-22 are now pending, have been examined and currently stand rejected.
Drawings
The drawings submitted on April 22, 2025 are acceptable.
Claim Interpretation
Non-Functional Language:
Regarding claim 11:
The phrase “wherein the information includes at least one of a history and a projected history of physical transactions related to the natural resource” is non- functional descriptive material as it only describes the information. This phrase does not affect how the positively recited steps are performed nor does it provide an operational connection to the rest of the claim.
Regarding claim 12:
The phrase “wherein the information includes a projected production date.” is non- functional descriptive material as it only describes the information. This phrase does not affect how the positively recited steps are performed nor does it provide an operational connection to the rest of the claim.
Regarding claim 13:
The phrase “wherein the information includes completed physical steps associated with at least one of mining, production, harvest, concentration, refining, and transportation steps undergone by the natural resource” is non- functional descriptive material as it only describes the information. This phrase does not affect how the positively recited steps are performed nor does it provide an operational connection to the rest of the claim.
Regarding claim 14:
The phrase “wherein the information includes scheduled or estimated physical steps associated with at least one of mining, production, harvest, concentration, refining, transportation, and delivery steps to be performed pursuant to monetization of the natural resource” is non- functional descriptive material as it only describes the information. This phrase does not affect how the positively recited steps are performed nor does it provide an operational connection to the rest of the claim.
Regarding claim 16:
The phrase “wherein the NFT carries data corresponding to: at least one physical step corresponding to a future action indicated for economic monetization of the natural resource.” is non- functional descriptive material as it only describes the information. This phrase does not affect how the positively recited steps are performed nor does it provide an operational connection to the rest of the claim.
Regarding claim 17:
The phrase “wherein the NFT carries data corresponding to: at least one physical step corresponding to a completed action made pursuant to economic monetization of the natural resource.” is non- functional descriptive material as it only describes the information. This phrase does not affect how the positively recited steps are performed nor does it provide an operational connection to the rest of the claim.
Regarding claim 18: The phrase “produced from within defined metes and bounds of an owned, claimed, or leased rights holding.” is non-functional descriptive material. The phrase describes how a potential commodity material was produced. However, this phrase does not affect the positively recited steps of claim 8.
It has been held that non-functional descriptive material will not distinguish the invention from the prior art in terms of patentability.
Examiner has provided prior art, where available, for these intended use and/or non-functional phrases/limitations, however, these phrases/limitations will not distinguish the invention from the prior art in terms of patentability. Accordingly, the prior art is only provided in the interest of compact prosecution.
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 8-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention recites and is directed to a judicial exception to patentability (i.e., an abstract idea) and does not provide an integration of the recited abstract idea into a practical application nor include an inventive concept that is “significantly more” than the recited abstract idea to which the claim is directed. MPEP §2106.
In determining subject matter eligibility in an Alice rejection under 35 U.S.C. §101, it is first determined as Step 1 whether the claims are directed to one of the four statutory categories of an invention (i.e., a process, a machine, a manufacture, or a composition of matter). MPEP §2106.03.
Here, the claims are directed to the statutory category of a method/process (Claims 8-22). Therefore, we proceed to Step 2A, Prong 1. MPEP §2106.
Under a Step 2A, Prong 1 analysis, it must be determined whether the claims recite an abstract idea that falls within one or more enumerated categories of patent ineligible subject matter that amounts to a judicial exception to patentability. MPEP §2106.04. Independent Claim 8 is selected as being representative of the independent claims in the instant application. Claim 8 recites:
A computer method for obtaining an interest in a natural resource, comprising:
receiving, from a server computer via a network onto a local computing device, first data indicating an availability of a distributed ledger non-fungible token (NFT) representing an interest in a natural resource;
displaying, on an electronic display operatively coupled to the local computing device, a graphical user interface including a listing representing the NFT, and a transaction object for receiving a command from a user to purchase the NFT;
receiving, from the user via a user interface and the transaction object, a command to exchange a cryptographic currency quantity for the NFT;
transmitting second data corresponding to the command to exchange the cryptographic currency quantity for the NFT from the local device to the server computer via the network;
receiving, from the server computer via the network, third data indicating that the cryptographic currency quantity is transferred from and the NFT is transferred to one or more electronic wallets controlled by the user;
causing the graphical user interface to display a first updated balance carried by the one or more electronic wallets, the first updated balance including a reduction in a cryptographic currency balance from the one or more electronic wallets and an addition of the NFT to the one or more electronic wallets;
receiving, from the server computer via the network, fourth data indicating that, upon delivery of the natural resource or a commodity material produced therefrom to a physical buyer, the NFT is transferred out of the one or more electronic wallets and a cryptographic currency quantity corresponding to payment for the natural resource or the commodity material is credited to the one or more electronic wallets; and
causing the graphical user interface to display a second updated balance reflecting the credited cryptographic currency quantity and the removal of the NFT from the one or more electronic wallets;
wherein the NFT carries an electronic contract serving as proof of ownership of the interest in the natural resource.
Here, the claims recite an abstract idea, or combination of abstract ideas of facilitating the purchase of a digital asset representing an ownership interest. The claim achieves this by displaying a listing, receiving a command to purchase, exchanging currency and updating wallet balances. The claim achieves this by establishing communication with a terminal device, receiving, from the terminal device a request comprising terminal data, generating an encrypted data exchange payload, validating the payload, receiving indication that the exchange was successfully completed, receiving data indicating that upon delivery of a commodity, the transfer is made and payment is credited and updating balances. This concept/abstract idea, which is identified in the bolded sections seen above, falls within the Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity grouping because it describes a commercial or legal interactions (e.g., a digital asset transaction and/or proof of ownership representation ).
Accordingly, it is determined that the claims recite an abstract idea since they fall within one or more of the three enumerated categories of patent ineligible subject matter. MPEP §2106.04.
Since it is determined that the claim(s) contain a judicial exception, it must then be determined, under Step 2A, Prong 2, whether the judicial exception is integrated into a practical application of the exception. MPEP §2106.04. In order to make this determination, the additional element(s) are analyzed to determine if the claim as a whole integrates the recited judicial exception into a practical application of that exception. Here claim 8 recite the additional element of a server computer, a network, a local computing device, a distributed ledger non-fungible token (NFT), an electronic display, a user interface and electronic wallets. These additional elements are all recited at a high-level of generality such that they amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception, or a portion thereof, using a generic computer component. See MPEP 2106.05(f). Additionally, Examiner finds no indication in the Specification, that the operations recited in the independent claims require any specialized computer hardware or other inventive computer components, i.e., a particular machine, invoke any allegedly inventive programming, or that the claimed invention is implemented using other than generic computer components to perform generic computer functions. Furthermore, there is no indication in the claim(s) that the use of a server computer, a network, a local computing device, a distributed ledger non-fungible token (NFT), an electronic display, a user interface and electronic wallets in combination with the abstract idea leads to an improvement of the processor, memory, another technology, or to a technical field. Accordingly, 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. Looking at the elements as a combination does not add anything more than the elements analyzed individually. Examiner further notes that even though the claims may not preempt all forms of the abstraction, this alone, does not make them any less abstract.
When analyzed under step 2B, the claim(s) does/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 a generic computing component (e.g., a server computer, a network, a local computing device, a distributed ledger non-fungible token (NFT), an electronic display, a user interface and electronic wallets) to implement the abstract idea 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 or significantly more than the judicial exception. Considered as an ordered combination, the additional elements recited in the claim(s) add nothing that is not already present when the steps are considered separately.
Therefore, claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. §101 and are not patent eligible. Dependent claims 9-22 when analyzed are held to be patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. §101 because the additional recited limitation(s) fail to establish that the claim(s) is/are not directed to an abstract idea.
Dependent claims 9 and 15 further refine the abstract idea by indicating that an information is request is received at the user interface, this request cause displaying data corresponding to the information related to the contract. These claims fail to include any new additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or provide significantly more than the abstract idea.
Dependent claims 10-14 further refine the abstract idea by describing the transaction object (i.e., is the information request) and further describing the information. These claims fail to include any new additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or provide significantly more than the abstract idea.
Dependent claims 16-17 further refine the abstract idea by describing the NFT. These claims fail to include any new additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or provide significantly more than the abstract idea.
Dependent claim 18 further refine the abstract idea by describing the data indicating the availability of the NFT. This claim fails to include any new additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or provide significantly more than the abstract idea.
Dependent claim 19 further refine the abstract idea by indicating that a balance is updated and displayed. This claim fails to include any new additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or provide significantly more than the abstract idea.
Dependent claims 20-21 further refine the abstract idea by receiving and causing display of data corresponding to the information related to the electronic contract includes receiving data fetched from a distributed file system and receiving data fetched from a FileCoin server. These claims fail to include any new additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or provide significantly more than the abstract idea.
Dependent claim 22 further refine the abstract idea by indicating that receiving and causing display of data corresponding to the information related to the electronic contract includes receiving data referenced from a distributed ledger transaction carrying an encrypted storage location; and fetching data from the storage location. This claim fails to include any new additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or provide significantly more than the abstract idea.
In summary, the dependent claims considered both individually and as an ordered combination do not provide meaningful limitations to transform the abstract idea into a patent eligible application of the abstract idea such that the claims amount to significantly more than the abstract ideas itself. The claims do not recite an improvement to another technology or technical field, an improvement to the functioning of the computer itself, or provide meaningful limitations beyond generally linking an abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the dependent claims are also not patent eligible.
Accordingly, it is determined that all claims are directed to non-statutory subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101 and are ineligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
The factual inquiries 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 8-10 and 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wiklof et al. U.S Patent Publication No. 2021/0241243 A1, hereinafter “Wiklof” in view of Wager et el. U.S. Patent Publication No. 2017/0024818 A1, hereinafter “Wager”.
Regarding claim 8: Wiklof disclose: A computer method for obtaining an interest in a natural resource, comprising:
receiving, from a server computer via a network onto a local computing device, first data indicating an availability of a distributed ledger non-fungible token (NFT) representing an interest in [a proprietary rights asset] (See at least Wiklof, Fig. 5; [0079]; [0083]; [0172]; a pool available for purchase; establish a user account for a proprietary rights exchange using a networked electronic device via a GUI provided by a server computer.) Note: The tokens may be based on Ethereum ERC-20 or ERC-721 standards or other public blockchain token. Exchange tokens may be fungible or non-fungible.
displaying, on an electronic display operatively coupled to the local computing device, a graphical user interface including a listing representing the NFT, and a transaction object for receiving a command from a user to purchase the NFT; (See at least Wiklof, Fig. 5; [0006]; includes presenting a plurality of groups of proprietary rights assets as icons in a graphical user interface (GUI))
receiving, from the user via a user interface and the transaction object, a command to exchange a cryptographic currency quantity for the NFT; (See at least Wiklof, Fig. 5; [0005-0006]; [0127]; [0238] receiving a graphical selection of a particular proprietary rights asset from a user via the GUI; receiving a verified request from a user, via the GUI, to swap a cryptographic currency, a second proprietary rights asset blockchain token corresponding to a second proprietary rights asset token, or an exchange token for a proprietary rights asset blockchain token; In one embodiment, the graphical user interface 2402 includes a proceed button 2412.)
transmitting second data corresponding to the command to exchange the cryptographic currency quantity for the NFT from the local device to the server computer via the network; (See at least Wiklof, [0091-0092]; transmitting a command to a server computer to initiate a transaction to swap a cryptographic currency or exchange token for the offered proprietary rights asset 710.)
receiving, from the server computer via the network, third data indicating that the cryptographic currency quantity is transferred from and the NFT is transferred to one or more electronic wallets controlled by the user; and (See at least Wiklof, Fig. 6; Fig. 13; [0006]; [0010]; and making an indication of a change in proprietary rights asset balance in the user wallet via the GUI.)
causing the graphical user interface to display an updated balance carried by the one or more electronic wallets, the updated balance including a reduction in a cryptographic currency balance from the one or more electronic wallets and an addition of the NFT to the one or more electronic wallets; (See at least Wiklof, Fig. 7; Fig. 13; display the user cryptographic currency and blockchain token balance in the gui)
wherein the NFT carries an electronic contract serving as proof of ownership of the interest in [a proprietary rights asset]. (See at least Wiklof, Fig. 12; [0004] For example, he issued proprietary rights asset tokens and/or proprietary rights license tokens may carry a contract (e.g., a smart contract) corresponding to a binding contract, such as an assignment of rights, via the plurality of proprietary rights asset tokens, to a subsequently identified party or parties.)
receiving, from the server computer via the network, fourth data indicating that the NFT is transferred out of the one or more electronic wallets and a cryptographic currency quantity corresponding to payment for the natural resource or the commodity material is credited to the one or more electronic wallets (See at least Wiklof, Fig. 6; INDICATE A CHANGE IN PROPRIETARY RIGHTS ASSET VALUE IN THE GUI; INDICATE A CHANGE IN CRYPTOGRAPHIC CURRENCY BALANCE IN THE GUI).
causing the graphical user interface to display a second updated balance reflecting the credited cryptographic currency quantity and the removal of the NFT from the one or more electronic wallets; (See at least Wiklof, Fig. 6; INDICATE A CHANGE IN PROPRIETARY RIGHTS ASSET VALUE IN THE GUI; INDICATE A CHANGE IN CRYPTOGRAPHIC CURRENCY BALANCE IN THE GUI).
Wiklof disclose verified request from a user, via the GUI, to swap a cryptographic currency, a second proprietary rights asset blockchain token corresponding to a second proprietary rights asset token, or an exchange token for a proprietary rights asset blockchain token; In one embodiment, the graphical user interface 2402 includes a proceed button 2412. Wiklof, [0127]; [0238]. Wiklof does not explicitly disclose that data corresponding to proof is data of natural resource rights. Wiklof does not explicitly disclose that the NFT is transferred upon delivery of the natural resource or a commodity material produced therefrom to a physical buyer.
Wager, on the other hand teaches that it was known in the art using tokens to assign rights to commodities (e.g., natural resources). (See at least Wager, [0029].)
the NFT is transferred upon delivery of the natural resource or a commodity material produced therefrom to a physical buyer. (See at least Wager, [0002]; [0003]; [0062]; upon delivery of the natural resource or a commodity material produced therefrom to a physical buyer (i.e., upon delivery of the commodity) the NFT is transferred out of the one or more electronic wallets and a cryptographic currency quantity corresponding to payment for the natural resource or the commodity material is credited to the one or more electronic wallets (e.g., transmitting the funds).
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 Wiklof and include Wager’s teachings in order to
provide efficiency. Furthermore, the substitution of the type of assets rights (e.g., proprietary rights, natural resource rights, renders the claim obvious.
Regarding claim 9: The combination of Wiklof and Wager disclose the computer method according to claim 8. The combination further disclose wherein displaying the graphical user interface on the electronic display includes displaying an information request object for receiving a command to display information related to the electronic contract serving as the proof of ownership of the interest in the natural resource; and (See at least Wiklof, [0061] The smart contract may include the commitment to sell at least a portion of the proprietary rights asset tokens at the committed bid price, according to an embodiment. Additionally or alternatively, displaying at least summary information about a proprietary rights asset from step 102 of FIG. 1 may include displaying a committed selling price. The smart contract may include the commitment to sell at least a portion of the proprietary rights asset tokens at the committed selling price, according to another embodiment.)
further comprising receiving and causing display of data corresponding to the information related to the electronic contract responsive to receiving actuation of the information request object and transmission of the activation to the server computer. (See at least Wiklof, [0061] The smart contract may include the commitment to sell at least a portion of the proprietary rights asset tokens at the committed bid price, according to an embodiment. Additionally or alternatively, displaying at least summary information about a proprietary rights asset from step 102 of FIG. 1 may include displaying a committed selling price. The smart contract may include the commitment to sell at least a portion of the proprietary rights asset tokens at the committed selling price, according to another embodiment.)
Regarding claim 10: The combination of Wiklof and Wager disclose the computer method according to claim 9. The combination further disclose wherein the transaction object and the information request object are the same object. (See at least Wiklof, [0237] the graphical user interface 2402 includes a proceed button 2412.)
Regarding claim 15: The combination of Wiklof and Wager disclose the computer method according to claim 9. The combination further disclose wherein receiving and causing display of data corresponding to the information related to the electronic contract responsive to receiving actuation of the information request object and transmission of the activation to the server computer includes receiving information read from the NFT. (See at least Wiklof, Abs.; Fig. 13; display, on a GUI, the enforcement funding corresponding to a token or the population of tokens.)
Regarding claim 16: The combination of Wiklof and Wager disclose the computer method according to claim 8. The combination further disclose wherein the NFT carries data corresponding to: at least one physical step corresponding to a future action indicated for economic monetization of the natural resource. (See at least Wiklof, [0124] According to an embodiment, step 1206 includes displaying an allocation of funds received in exchange for the proprietary rights asset blockchain token, including an allocation for possible future enforcement of IP rights corresponding to the proprietary rights asset.)
Regarding claim 17: The combination of Wiklof and Wager disclose the computer method according to claim 8. The combination further disclose; wherein the NFT carries data corresponding to: at least one physical step corresponding to a completed action made pursuant to economic monetization of the natural resource. (See at least Wiklof, [0124] According to an embodiment, step 1206 includes displaying an allocation of funds received in exchange for the proprietary rights asset blockchain token, including an allocation for possible future enforcement of IP rights corresponding to the proprietary rights asset.)
Regarding claim 18: The combination of Wiklof and Wager disclose the method of claim 8. The combination further disclose wherein receiving the first data indicating the availability of the distributed ledger non-fungible token includes receiving data indicating the availability of the distributed ledger nonfungible token representing a fractional value of at least a potential commodity material produced from within defined metes and bounds of an owned, claimed, or leased rights holding. (See at least Wiklof, [0115]; may include offering a fractional interest in the proprietary rights asset if the user credential meets the credential requirement, via the user interface. The fractional interest may include a fractional ownership interest or a fractional economic interest.)
Claim(s) 11-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wiklof and Wager as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Lee (US 2019/0354967A1).
Regarding claim 11: The combination of Wiklof and Wager disclose the computer method according to claim 9. The combination does not explicitly disclose, However Lee teaches; wherein the information includes at least one of a history and a projected history of physical transactions related to the natural resource. (See at least Lee, [0136] The processor 250 performs an operation corresponding to the contract condition for the smart contract searched by the decentralized application 120 in accordance with the request of the user and displays the interface screen representing information on the fulfilled contract history or the fulfilled contract result.)
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 Wiklof and include Lee’s teachings in order to allow users to evaluate the natural resource.
Regarding claim 12: The combination of Wiklof and Wager disclose the computer method according to claim 11. The combination do not explicitly disclose; however Lee teaches wherein the information includes a projected production date. (See at least Lee, [0136] The processor 250 performs an operation corresponding to the contract condition for the smart contract searched by the decentralized application 120 in accordance with the request of the user and displays the interface screen representing information on the fulfilled contract history or the fulfilled contract result.)
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 Wiklof and include Lee’s teachings in order to allow users to evaluate the natural resource.
Regarding claim 13: The combination of Wiklof and Wager disclose the computer method according to claim 9. The combination do not explicitly disclose, However Lee teaches, wherein the information includes completed physical steps associated with at least one of mining, production, harvest, concentration, refining, and transportation steps undergone by the natural resource. (See at least Lee, [0136] The processor 250 performs an operation corresponding to the contract condition for the smart contract searched by the decentralized application 120 in accordance with the request of the user and displays the interface screen representing information on the fulfilled contract history or the fulfilled contract result.)
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 Wiklof and include Lee’s teachings in order to allow users to evaluate the natural resource.
Regarding claim 14: The combination of Wiklof and Wager disclose the computer method according to claim 9. The combination do not explicitly disclose, However Lee teaches wherein the information includes scheduled or estimated physical steps associated with at least one of mining, production, harvest, concentration, refining, transportation, and delivery steps to be performed pursuant to monetization of the natural resource. (See at least Lee, [0136] The processor 250 performs an operation corresponding to the contract condition for the smart contract searched by the decentralized application 120 in accordance with the request of the user and displays the interface screen representing information on the fulfilled contract history or the fulfilled contract result.)
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 Wiklof and include Lee’s teachings in order to allow users to evaluate the natural resource.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wiklof as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Hoersten (US 20190305943 A1).
Regarding claim 19: The combination of Wiklof and Wager disclose the computer method according to claim 8. The combination further disclose wherein causing the graphical user interface to display an updated balance carried by the at least one electronic wallet (See at least Wiklof, Fig 6; [0006]; [0090]; indicate a change in cryptographic currency balance in the GUI; includes making an indication 706 of a change in proprietary rights asset token balance in the user wallet via the GUI, according to an embodiment.)
The combination do not explicitly disclose, however Hoersten, on the other hand teaches includes displaying at least partial content of a hierarchical deterministic (HD) wallet. (See at least Hoersten [0041] addition to the display screen (800 in FIGS. 8 and 900 in FIG. 9, respectively), the computing devices may comprise one or more processors, memory registers, network interface controllers, and an application (e.g., a deterministic wallet application) and transmission component (e.g., email, text, or other application or way for transmitting or communicating information that is coextensive with the processor) for communicating the extended public key.)
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 above combination and include Hoersten’s teachings in order to ensure accuracy, security, and user experience.
Claim(s) 20-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wiklof as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Hoersten (US 2019/0317936 A1).
Regarding claim 20: The combination of Wiklof and Wager disclose the computer method according to claim 9. The combination do not explicitly disclose; however Keskar teaches; wherein receiving and causing display of data corresponding to the information related to the electronic contract includes receiving data fetched from a distributed file system. (See at least Keskar, Abs.; [0038]; [0053] Each of the plurality of blockchains is configured for a communication with the distributed file system storage using the one or more standard method calls of the default system smart contract).
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 above combination and include Keskar’s teachings in order to offer superior reliability, scalability, and speed.
Regarding claim 21: The combination of Wiklof and Wager disclose the computer method according to claim 9. The combination do not explicitly disclose; however Keskar teaches wherein receiving and causing display of data corresponding to the information related to the electronic contract includes receiving data fetched from a FileCoin server. (See at least Keskar, Abs.; [0038]; [0053] Each of the plurality of blockchains is configured for a communication with the distributed file system storage using the one or more standard method calls of the default system smart contract).
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 above combination and include Keskar’s teachings in order to offer superior reliability, scalability, and speed.
Regarding claim 22: The combination of Wiklof and Wager disclose the computer method according to claim 9. The combination do not explicitly disclose; however Keskar teaches wherein receiving and causing display of data corresponding to the information related to the electronic contract includes receiving data referenced from a distributed ledger transaction carrying an encrypted storage location; and fetching data from the storage location. (See at least Keskar, Abs.; [0038]; [0053] Each of the plurality of blockchains is configured for a communication with the distributed file system storage using the one or more standard method calls of the default system smart contract; Prior to writing an information on the distributed file storage system, each of the plurality of blockchains uses its private key to encrypt the information. This ensures the information is always stored in secure form on the distributed file storage system.)
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 above combination and include Keskar’s teachings in order to offer superior reliability, scalability, and speed.
Response to Arguments
Non-Functional Language
Applicant assert that the identified language does provide meaningful functional limitations to the respective claims and is not merely non-functional descriptive material, however, Applicant does not provide a specific argument and reserves the right to traverse the Office's non-functional language characterizations.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C §101
Step 2A- Prong One:
Applicant assert that when the claim is properly characterized based on its actual language, rather than at an impermissibly high level of abstraction, the claimed invention is directed to a specific technical implementation of a distributed ledger NFT system for natural resource rights management that integrates blockchain technology with real-world physical commodity production and delivery events, and is not directed to an abstract idea, that the claims are so much more than mere "certain methods of organizing human activities and that the claims are not directed to mental processes and mathematical concepts, nor are they alleged to be (Remarks, pp. 8-11). The Examiner’s characterization of the judicial exception is based on the claim as a whole and is not an impermissible oversimplification. The claim recite: receiving information indicating availability of an NFT representing ownership interest; displaying NFT for purchase; receiving a user command to exchange cryptocurrency for NFT; receiving data indicating transferring the cryptocurrency and NFT between wallets; and displaying updated balances. These limitations describe facilitating the purchase of a digital asset representing an ownership interest (e.g., an asset transaction/exchange).
Step 2A - Prong Two:
Applicant asserts that that claim 8 at least provides additional elements that "reflect[s] an improvement in the functioning of a computer, or an improvement to other technology or technical field' or "applies or uses the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment (Remarks, pp. 11-17). Examiner respectfully disagrees. In order to determine whether the claims integrate the judicial exception into a practical application, the additional elements are analyzed to determine the claim as a whole integrates the recited judicial exception into a practical application. The claim elements (e.g., a server computer, a network, a local computing device, an electronic display, a user interface and electronic wallets) merely apply the exception, or a portion thereof, using a generic computer component. Furthermore, the additional elements of a distributed ledger, non-fungible token (NFT), are mere computer component and/or "apply it" and do not improve upon the processors, or blockchain.
Applicant assert that, as in Similarly to In Ex parte Guillaume Desjardins, independent claim 8 recites a specific technical architecture and ordered control flow that improves the operation of a distributed ledger NFT lifecycle management system for natural resource rights (Remarks, pp. 17-21). Examiner respectfully disagrees. In Desjardins, the claims provided a specific improvement (e.g. reduced storage, reduced system complexity and streamlining, and preservation of performance attributes associated with earlier tasks during subsequent computational tasks) and this improvement was reflected in the claims. In contrast, the Applicant’s claim invention reciting receiving data of availability, receiving a command to exchange, transmitting the command, receiving data that the cryptocurrency has been transferred, receiving data with an indication of transfers, and displaying updated balances, does not provide an improvement to the blockchain, electronic wallet, computer network or other technical field. Furthermore, the recitation that upon delivery of the natural resource or a commodity material produced therefrom to a physical buyer, the NFT is transferred out of the one or more electronic wallets and a cryptographic currency quantity corresponding to payment for the natural resource or the commodity material is credited to the one or more electronic wallets, and the graphical user interface displays a second updated balance reflecting the credited payment and the removal of the NFT, merely defines a condition under which ownership and payment are updated does not itself provide a technological improvement.
Step 2B Analysis:
Applicant asserts that “the recitation that upon delivery of the natural resource or a commodity material produced therefrom to a physical buyer…” provides a specific technical improvement to distributed ledger NFT lifecycle management systems by automatically updating the state of a distributed ledger NFT and associated electronic wallets in response to a real-world physical commodity delivery event (a specific technical capability not taught by, and not well-understood, routine, or conventional in view of, the prior art of record) (Remarks, p. 21). Examiner respectfully disagrees. As indicated above, said recitation does not provide a technological improvement.
Applicant further argues that the recitation that the NFT carries an electronic contract serving as proof of ownership of the interest in the natural resource provides a specific technical improvement to distributed ledger data architecture by immutably embedding legally operative proof of natural resource rights ownership within the NFT itself, making the proof data more failure and hacking resistant owing to distributed encrypted storage of the NFT, transactions, and information, and by retrieval of information from redundant storage nodes. This recitation describes a legal interaction (e.g., contractual ownership tracking and proof of ownership representation).
Claim Rejections - 3 5 U.S. C. §103
Applicant asserts that Wiklof and Wager do not disclose or suggest at least; "receiving. from a server computer via a network onto a local computing device. first data indicating an availability of a distributed ledger non-fungible token (NFT) representing an interest in a natural resource... ". Examiner respectfully disagrees. Wiklof disclose pool available for purchase (See at least Wiklof, [0079]).
Applicant asserts that Wiklof and Wager fails to disclose an NFT representing an interest in a natural resource. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Wager was cited for this limitation to teach the description of the resource or commodity. See Wager, [0029] For example, the commodity may be a metal (e.g., gold, silver, copper, platinum, palladium, etc.), a natural resource (e.g., oil, natural gas, diesel, ethanol, uranium, wheat, com, sugar, soybean, coffee, coco, rice, oats, mils, lumber, etc.), a financial asset (e.g., a security, a treasury bond, a stock, etc.).
Applicant asserts that Wager does not disclose or suggest a non-fungible token of any kind. Wager's tokens are fungible representations of undifferentiated commodity quantity ownership positions. Furthermore, applicant argues that Wager's fungible commodity tokens do not teach and cannot be combined with Wiklof to arrive at a non-fungible token representing a unique natural resource right. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Wiklof disclose the use of NFT’s. See Wiklof, [0172] The tokens may be based on Ethereum ERC-20 or ERC-721 standards or other public blockchain token. Exchange tokens may be fungible or non-fungible.
Applicant asserts that Wiklof and Wager do not disclose or suggest: "receiving, from the server computer via the network. fourth data indicating that. upon delivery of the natural resource or a commodity material produced therefrom to a physical buyer. the NFT is transferred out of the one or more electronic wallets and a cryptographic currency quantity corresponding to payment for the natural resource or the commodity material is credited to the one or more electronic wallets; and causing the graphical user interface to display an updated balance reflecting the credited cryptographic currency quantity and the removal of the NFT from the one or more electronic wallets ... ". (Remarks, p.27). Wiklof disclose receiving, from the server computer via the network, fourth data indicating that the NFT is transferred out of the one or more electronic wallets and a cryptographic currency quantity corresponding to payment for the natural resource or the commodity material is credited to the one or more electronic wallets (See at least Wiklof, Fig. 6; INDICATE A CHANGE IN PROPRIETARY RIGHTS ASSET VALUE IN THE GUI; INDICATE A CHANGE IN CRYPTOGRAPHIC CURRENCY BALANCE IN THE GUI). Wiklof does not explicitly disclose, however, Wager teaches the NFT is transferred upon delivery of the natural resource or a commodity material produced therefrom to a physical buyer. (See at least Wager, [0002]; [0003]; [0062]; upon delivery of the natural resource or a commodity material produced therefrom to a physical buyer (i.e., upon delivery of the commodity) the NFT is transferred out of the one or more electronic wallets and a cryptographic currency quantity corresponding to payment for the natural resource or the commodity material is credited to the one or more electronic wallets (e.g., transmitting the funds).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KARLYANNIE M GARCIA whose telephone number is (571)272-6950. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30am - 4:30-pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Patrick McAtee can be reached at (571) 272-7575. 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.
/K.G.M/Examiner, Art Unit 3698
/EDUARDO CASTILHO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3698
Prosecution Insights