Detailed Action
This is a Non-final Office action in response to communications received on 6/26/2025. Claims 1-20 are pending and are 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 .
Drawings
The drawings, 6/26/2025, are acknowledged.
Provisional Priority
The provisional priority date of 9/29/2023 is acknowledged.
Claim Objections
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 8, the claim recites "The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising: determining, by the platform, that the match exists between at least one of the one or more other generated nonfungible tokens associated with the subsequent request match to at least one of the one or more generated nonfungible tokens associated with the request comprises: determining…” Which is grammatically incorrect.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 12-19 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.
Regarding claims 12-19, the claims recite “The system of claim 10”, however, claim 10 recites a computer-implemented method. For purposes of examination, Examiner regards this as a typographical error with the original intent of reciting dependence on system claim 11. Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-3, 5-9, 11 and 14 of U.S. Patent No. US 12,367,266 B2 (Roper). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the present application are taught by the use of synonyms and change of limitation order from the patent identified above. Claims 1-10 of the instant application are provided as representative comparisons for independent claims 11 and 20 as well as their dependents for reciting substantially identical matter.
Application 19/250,500
Patent No. US 12,367,266 B2
1. A computer-implemented method comprising: receiving, at a platform and from a client device, a request to execute an operation on a model;
generating, by the platform, a fungible token that identifies the request to execute the operation on the model and one or more nonfungible tokens associated with data that identifies one or more tools for executing the operation;
while executing the operation on the model, generating, by the platform, one or more other nonfungible tokens associated with data that identifies one or more other tools for executing another operation on the model based on a received subsequent request;
determining, by the platform, whether at least one of the one or more other generated nonfungible tokens associated with the subsequent request match to at least one of the one or more generated nonfungible tokens associated with the request; and
in response to determining that a match exists, preventing, by the platform, execution of the other operation.
1. A computer-implemented method comprising: receiving, at a digital platform, from a client device, a request to execute an operation on a digital model;
generating, by the digital platform, a fungible idempotent token that uniquely identifies the request to execute the operation on the digital model; selecting, by the digital platform, data that identifies one or more tools for executing the operation…
generating, by the digital platform, one or more nonfungible idempotent tokens associated with the data that identifies the one or more selected tools; …determining, by the digital platform and from the one or more nonfungible idempotent tokens, whether to additionally execute the operation on the digital model based on a subsequent request
determining, by the digital platform and from the one or more nonfungible idempotent tokens, whether to additionally execute the operation on the digital model based on a subsequent request; and
in response to determining that the additional execution of the operation has been requested while the operation is being executed, preventing, by the digital platform, the additional execution of the operation.
2. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein generating the fungible token comprises generating the fungible token and a universally unique identifier that identifies the request.
2. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein generating the fungible idempotent token that uniquely identifies the request comprises generating the fungible idempotent token and a universally unique identifier that uniquely identifies the request to execute the operation on the digital model.
3. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the fungible token comprises at least one of data that identifies the client device that transmitted the request, the operation to be performed on the model, or data identifying the model.
3. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the fungible idempotent token comprises data that identifies the client device that transmitted the request, the operation to be performed on the digital model, and data identifying the digital model.
4. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein generating each of the one or more nonfungible tokens comprises associating, by the platform, data that identifies the client device that transmitted the request, the operation to be performed on the model, the data identifying the model, a universally unique identifier, data identifying the fungible token, and the data that identifies a corresponding tool.
5. …wherein each nonfungible idempotent token comprises data that identifies the client device that transmitted the request, the operation to be performed on the digital model, the data identifying the digital model, and the data that identifies the selected tool.
2. …a universally unique identifier that uniquely identifies the request to execute the operation on the digital model.
5. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising: in response to a completion of the execution of the operation on the model, discarding, by the platform, the generated fungible token and the one or more nonfungible tokens; and
in response to discarding the generated fungible token and the one or more nonfungible tokens, enabling, by the platform, the operation to be performed on the model in one or more subsequent requests.
9. …discarding, by the digital platform, (i) the another fungible idempotent token and (ii) the one or more other generated nonfungible idempotent tokens; and storing, by the digital platform, data indicating the received request and the received subsequent request for auditing.
7. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising receiving, while the digital platform executes the operation on the digital model from the request, the subsequent request to execute a same operation on the digital model.
6. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein generating the fungible token that identifies the request to execute the operation on the model and the one or more nonfungible tokens prevents duplication of the operation from being executed while executing the operation on the model.
8. …the additional execution of the operation on the digital model is to be prevented.
7. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the fungible token and the one or more nonfungible tokens share common metadata.
6. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the fungible idempotent token and the one or more nonfungible idempotent tokens share common metadata.
8. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising: determining, by the platform, that the match exists between at least one of the one or more other generated nonfungible tokens associated with the subsequent request match to at least one of the one or more generated nonfungible tokens associated with the request comprises:
determining, by the platform, that at least one of the tools associated with one of the one or more generated nonfungible tokens is still active in performing the operation on the model; and
determining, by the platform, that data identifying the at least one of the tools that is still active matches to data identifying at least one of the tools associated with the one or more other nonfungible tokens.
14. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving, by the digital platform and from the client device, the subsequent request to execute the operation on the digital model; determining, by the digital platform, whether the one or more generated nonfungible idempotent tokens generated from the request remain active; determining, by the digital platform, whether to prevent the additional execution of the operation on the digital model using the one or more generated nonfungible idempotent tokens from the request; and in response to determining that the one or more generated nonfungible idempotent tokens remain active, preventing, by the digital platform, the additional execution of the operation on the digital model.
9. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein preventing the execution of the other operation on the model comprises: transmitting, by the platform and to the client device, a notification indicating that the execution of the other operation cannot be performed while the operation is performed;
discarding, by the platform, the one or more other generated nonfungible tokens and the subsequent request; and
storing, by the platform, data indicating the received request and the received subsequent request.
9. The computer-implemented method of claim 8, wherein preventing the additional execution of the operation on the digital model comprises: transmitting, by the digital platform and to the client device, a notification to indicate that the additional execution of the operation cannot be performed; discarding, by the digital platform, (i) the another fungible idempotent token and (ii) the one or more other generated nonfungible idempotent tokens; and storing, by the digital platform, data indicating the received request and the received subsequent request for auditing.
10. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising: storing, by the platform, the one or more tools in a tools database, the one or more tools comprise model-based systems engineering (MBSE) tools, augmented reality (AR) tools, computer aided design (CAD) tools, computational fluid dynamics (CFD) tools, finite element analysis (FEA) tools, electronic design automation (EDA) tools, data analytics tools, modeling and simulation (M&S) tools, product lifecycle management (PLM) tools; and storing one or more models, the one or more models comprise simulation engines, requirements models, electronics models, test-plan models, cost-models, schedule models, software modeling, supply-chain models, manufacturing models, cyber security models, multi- attribute trade-space tools, and mission effects models.
11. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising: storing, by the digital platform, the one or more tools in a tools database, the one or more tools comprise model-based systems engineering (MBSE) tools, augmented reality (AR) tools, computer aided design (CAD) tools, computational fluid dynamics (CFD) tools, finite element analysis (FEA) tools, electronic design automation (EDA) tools, data analytics tools, modeling and simulation (M&S) tools, product lifecycle management (PLM) tools; and storing one or more digital models, the one or more digital models comprise simulation engines, requirements models, electronics models, test-plan models, cost-models, schedule models, software modeling, supply-chain models, manufacturing models, cyber security models, multi-attribute trade-space tools, and mission effects models.
Prior Art Considered But Not Relied Upon
Carter (US 20220319260 A1) which teaches an access management system configured to unlock the lock of a storage container, or a compartment thereof, when a non-fungible token (NFT) or an image corresponding to a NFT is read by an Al EM device and verified by the software platform.
Morris (US 20220391850 A1) which teaches a blockchain platform configured to generate digital employability assets for each user. To trade the digital employability assets in the digital labor marketplace, a non-fungible token (NFT) is generated based on the digital employability asset.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BLAKE ISAAC NARRAMORE whose telephone number is (303)297-4357. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 0700-1700 MT.
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, Taghi T Arani can be reached on (571) 272-3787. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BLAKE I NARRAMORE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2438
Prosecution Insights