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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1- 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The preamble of Claim 1 sets forth, “A method for providing a 24-hour currency exchange service based on a blockchain wallet” in lines 1-2, then repeats this recitation in lines 14-15. Claims 2-9 also end with the recitation, “in the method for providing a 24-hour currency exchange service based on a blockchain wallet”. It is unclear if applicant is intending to set forth a second method or if applicant is referencing the preamble of the claim since the specification sets for that, “the rate may be determined using other methods” in paragraph [0050]. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the amount of the requested first national currency" in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "recording the corresponding amount of the second national currency" in lines 8-9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential steps, such omission amounting to a gap between the steps. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted steps are: Claim 9 is dependent from independent Claim 1, which sets forth steps (a) – (c), yet claim 9 sets forth step (f) without setting forth steps (d) and (e). It is unclear if step (f) can occur without steps (d) and (e) being performed first. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the method" in lines 3 and 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the main server" in line 17. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. While the claim sets forth “a server” in line 1 and “the server” in line 17, it is unclear if “the main server” is the same server or a separate server than “the server”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claims 1-10 are directed to a system, method, or product which are/is one of the statutory categories of invention. (Step 1: YES).
The Examiner has identified independent method Claim 1 as the claim that represents the claimed invention for analysis and is similar to independent system Claim 10. Claim 1 recites the limitations of (a) generating a wallet account linked to a first national currency bank account of a user in response to a request from a user terminal; (b) receiving a currency exchange request from the user terminal and determining an exchange rate; and (c) verifying whether the amount of the requested first national currency has been deposited into the wallet account, and if the deposit has been made, recording the corresponding amount of the second national currency in the wallet account and distributing and storing the exchange transaction between the first and second national currencies on a blockchain network, wherein in step (b),if the exchange request occurs outside of business hours when a standard exchange rate from a foreign exchange broker is not available, the exchange rate is determined according to a predefined policy set by the main server so that the exchange is executed accordingly, in a method for providing a 24-hour currency exchange service based on a blockchain wallet.
These limitations, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitation as certain methods of organizing human activity. A 24-hour currency exchange recites a fundamental economic practice. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation as a fundamental economic practice, then it falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. The user terminal, blockchain network, and main server in Claim 1 and memory, processor, user terminal, blockchain network, main server, and server in Claim 10 is just applying generic computer components to the recited abstract limitations. Claim 10 is also abstract for similar reasons. (Step 2A-Prong 1: YES. The claims are abstract)
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claims only recite the user terminal, blockchain network, and main server in Claim 1 and memory, processor, user terminal, blockchain network, main server, and server in Claim 10. The computer hardware is recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, these additional elements, when considered separately and as an ordered combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Therefore, claims 1 and 10 are directed to an abstract idea without a practical application. (Step 2A-Prong 2: NO. The additional claimed elements are not integrated into a practical application)
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because, when considered separately and as an ordered combination, they do not add significantly more (also known as an “inventive concept”) to the exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using a computer hardware amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. See Applicant’s specification para. [0026-0028, 0081] about implementation using general purpose or special purpose computing devices and MPEP 2106.05(f) where applying a computer as a tool is not indicative of significantly more. Even assuming there was a technical problem, the claims, as written, fail to recite the details of how a technical solution to the technical problem was accomplished. If there was a technical problem (e.g., existing technology was incapable of performing the claimed functions) then the claims should recite the details of the technical solution (e.g., how existing technology was improved to overcome this inability). However, the claims, as written, provide no such details and merely recite that the claimed functions (i.e., the outcome) are being performed. Accordingly, these additional elements, when considered separately and as an ordered combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Thus claims 1 and 10 are not patent eligible. (Step 2B: NO. The claims do not provide significantly more)
Dependent claims 2-9 further define the abstract idea that is present in their respective independent claims 1 and 10 and thus correspond to Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity and hence are abstract for the reasons presented above. Claim 2 further defines the wallet of step a; Claims 3 and 4 further detail step b without adding significantly more; Claims 5 and 6 further detail step c; Claims 7 and 8 further include exchanging the second currency to the first currency and only recording the exchange without performing the transaction without adding significantly more; Claim 9 further includes a withdrawal request for the second national currency from a second national currency bank account. The dependent claims do not include any additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception when considered both individually and as an ordered combination. Therefore, the claims 2-9 are directed to an abstract idea. Thus, the claims 1-10 are not patent-eligible.
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.
Claim(s) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. PGPub. 2021/0241243 (Wiklof et al. ‘243) in view of U.S. PGPub. 2022/0374877 (Treitlinger et al. ‘877).
Re Claim 1: Wiklof et al. ‘243 disclose a method for providing a 24-hour currency exchange service based on a blockchain wallet (paragraphs [0170-0172]), performed by a main server, comprising:(a) generating a wallet account linked to a user in response to a request from a user terminal (paragraphs [0013, 0015]); (b) receiving a currency exchange request from the user terminal and determining an exchange rate (Figure 1-4; paragraphs [0049-0062]); and(c) verifying whether the amount of the requested first national currency has been deposited into the wallet account, and if the deposit has been made, recording the corresponding amount of the second national currency in the wallet account and distributing and storing the exchange transaction between the first and second national currencies on a blockchain network (abstract; paragraphs [0049-0054, 0240]), wherein in step (b),if the exchange request occurs outside of business hours when a standard exchange rate from a foreign exchange broker is not available, the exchange rate is determined according to a predefined policy set by the main server so that the exchange is executed accordingly, in a method for providing a 24-hour currency exchange service based on a blockchain wallet (paragraphs [0170-0172]).
Wiklof et al. ‘243 disclose the method substantially as claimed in supra, with the exception of including that the wallet account is linked to a first national currency bank account. Treitlinger et al. ‘877 disclose a method for conversion of digital assets to fiat currency using an electronic wallet account from a bank of other financial institution (paragraphs [0016, 0017]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date to modify the method of Wiklof et al. ‘243, in view of the teachings of Treitlinger et al. ‘877, to include that the wallet account is linked to a bank or other financial institution for the basic reason of combining known methods of currency conversion to yield the predictable result of a more trustworthy/verifiable process.
Re Claim 2: Wiklof et al. ‘243 in view of Treitlinger et al. ‘877 disclose the method substantially as claimed, in supra, including that in step (a),the wallet account is generated to be linked with a bank account operated by a domestic bank and an account (Treitlinger et al. ‘877: paragraphs [0016, 0017]) operated by the main server, in the method for providing a 24-hour currency exchange service based on a blockchain wallet (Wiklof et al. ‘243: paragraphs [0170-0172]).
Re Claim 3: Wiklof et al. ‘243 in view of Treitlinger et al. ‘877 disclose the method substantially as claimed, in supra, including that step (b) comprises:(b-1) receiving input, from the user terminal, of the type and amount of the first national currency to be deposited into the wallet account;(b-2) receiving input, from the user terminal, of the type of the second national currency to be received in the wallet account; and (b-3) determining an exchange rate for purchasing the second national currency with the first national currency based on a policy of the main server and the time at which the exchange request is received, in the method for providing a 24-hour currency exchange service based on a blockchain wallet (Wiklof et al. ‘243: (abstract; paragraphs [0049-0054, 0170-0172, 0240]).
Re Claim 4: Wiklof et al. ‘243 in view of Treitlinger et al. ‘877 disclose the method substantially as claimed, in supra, including that the exchange rate is set according to the standard rate provided by a foreign exchange broker, or, during non-business hours of the foreign exchange broker, is set based on the average of the day's buying and selling rates, in the method for providing a 24-hour currency exchange service based on a blockchain wallet (Wiklof et al. ‘243: paragraphs [0010, 0049-0054, 0091, 0170-0172]).
Re Claim 5: Wiklof et al. ‘243 in view of Treitlinger et al. ‘877 disclose the method substantially as claimed, in supra, including that step (c) comprises: after recording the exchange transaction in the wallet account, generating first block information by matching the type and amount of the first national currency, the type and amount of the second national currency, the exchange rate, the time of exchange, and identification information of the user terminal, and distributing and storing the first block information on a blockchain network using a blockchain technique in at least one main server and another terminal connected to the main server, in the method for providing a 24-hour currency exchange service based on a blockchain wallet (Wiklof et al. ‘243: paragraphs [0010, 0049-0054, 0091, 0170-0172]).
Re Claim 6: Wiklof et al. ‘243 in view of Treitlinger et al. ‘877 disclose the method substantially as claimed, in supra, including that the exchange transaction record includes the exchanged amount of the second national currency, the exchange rate, and the time of exchange for each transaction, and further displays exchange gain/loss information between the amount of the second national currency at the time of exchange and the amount at a preset time before or after that exchange, in the method for providing a 24-hour currency exchange service based on a blockchain wallet (Wiklof et al. ‘243: paragraphs [0010, 0049-0054, 0091, 0170-0172]).
Re Claim 7: Wiklof et al. ‘243 in view of Treitlinger et al. ‘877 disclose the method substantially as claimed, in supra, including that further comprising:(d) receiving, from the user terminal, a request to exchange the second national currency stored in the wallet into the first national currency; and(e) determining an exchange rate for selling the second national currency and buying the first national currency, recording the exchange transaction in the wallet, generating second block information by matching the type and amount of the first and second national currencies, exchange rate, exchange time, and user terminal identification information, and distributing and storing the second block information on a blockchain network, in the method for providing a 24-hour currency exchange service based on a blockchain wallet (Wiklof et al. ‘243: paragraphs [0010, 0049-0054, 0091, 0170-0172]).
Re Claim 8: Wiklof et al. ‘243 in view of Treitlinger et al. ‘877 disclose the method substantially as claimed, in supra, including that steps (c) through (e) include generating and distributing first and second block information for the exchange transactions, without performing actual fund transfers between the bank accounts for the first and second national currencies, and only recording the exchange transaction in the wallet, in the method for providing a 24-hour currency exchange service based on a blockchain wallet (Wiklof et al. ‘243: paragraphs [0010, 0049-0054, 0091, 0170-0172]).
Re Claim 9: Wiklof et al. ‘243 in view of Treitlinger et al. ‘877 disclose the method substantially as claimed, in supra, including further comprising:(f) upon receiving a withdrawal request for the second national currency from the user terminal, withdrawing the requested amount from a second national currency bank account associated with the main server and transferring it to a bank account designated by the user terminal; and upon receiving a withdrawal request for the first national currency from the user terminal, withdrawing the requested amount from a first national currency bank account associated with the main server and transferring it to the first national currency bank account linked with the wallet account, in the method for providing a 24-hour currency exchange service based on a blockchain wallet (Wiklof et al. ‘243: paragraphs [0009, 0128, 0170-0172]).
Re Claim 10: Server claim 10 is substantially similar to previously rejected method claim 1, and is therefore considered to be rejected here using the same art and rationale.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. References C-G on PTO-892 have been included as representing the relevant art at the time of filing.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LINDSAY M MAGUIRE whose telephone number is (571)272-6039. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 8:30 to 5:00.
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, Anita Coupe can be reached at (571) 270-3614. 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.
Lindsay Maguire
7/2/26
/LINDSAY M MAGUIRE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619
Prosecution Insights