Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Status of Claims
This is the first office action on the merits in response to the application filed on 07/16/2025.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been examined.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a US Application No. 18/891,825 filed on 09/20/2024 is acknowledged. Applicant's claim for the benefit of a US Provisional Application No. 63/539,709 filed on 09/21/2023 is acknowledged.
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 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,387,205 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because every limitation in instant claim 1 have a similarly-worded limitation in claim 1 of US Patent 12,387,205 B2. For example, claim 1 of 12,387,205 B2 comprise the concept of “spend a first blockchain object associated with the first node and representing a first amount of an asset for a game; spend a second blockchain object associated with the second node and representing a second amount of the asset for the game; and generate a state channel object associated with an initial virtual object representing an initial state of the game, the first amount of the asset, and the second amount of the asset; based on a first signature associated with the first node, cryptographically signing the first transaction as an updated first transaction; and transmitting the updated first transaction to a distributed network for inclusion in a first block of a blockchain; generating a second transaction configured to: spend the state channel object associated with a target virtual object representing a target state of the game, a third amount of the asset associated with the first node, and a fourth amount of the asset associated with the second node; generate a third blockchain object associated with the first node and representing the third amount of the asset; and generate a fourth blockchain object associated with the second node and representing the fourth amount of the asset; and transmitting the transaction to the distributed network for inclusion in a second block of the blockchain.”
Claim 2 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,387,205 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because every limitation in instant claim 2 have a similarly-worded limitation in claim 1 of US Patent 12,387,205 B2. For example, claim 1 in 12,387,205 B2 comprises the concept of “generating a second transaction configured to: spend the initial virtual object; and generate a first virtual object representing a first state of the game; and " transmitting the second transaction to the second node.”
Claim 3 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 2 of U.S. Patent No. 12,387,205 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because every limitation in instant claim 3 have a similarly-worded limitation in claim 2 of US Patent 12,387,205 B2. For example, claim 2 in 12,387,205 B2 comprises the concept of “wherein generating the first transaction comprises generating the first transaction configured to generate the state channel object associated with the initial virtual object representing a first sub object representing the first amount of the asset for the first node; and wherein generating the second transaction comprises generating the second transaction configured to: spend the first sub object; generate a third sub object representing a fifth amount of the asset associated with the first state of the game; and generate a fourth sub object representing a sixth amount of the asset for the first node and corresponding to a difference between the first amount and the third amount.”
Claim 4 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 3 of U.S. Patent No. 12,387,205 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because every limitation in instant claim 4 have a similarly-worded limitation in claim 3 of US Patent 12,387,205 B2. For example, claim 3 in 12,387,205 B2 comprise the concept of “generate a second virtual object representing a second state of the game; and generate a second sub object representing: the fifth amount of the asset associated with the first state of the game; and a sixth amount of the asset associated with the second state of the game; and transmitting the fourth transaction to the second node.”
Claim 5 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 3 of U.S. Patent No. 12,387,205 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because every limitation in instant claim 5 have a similarly-worded limitation in claim 4 of US Patent 12,387,205 B2. For example, claim 3 in 12,387,205 B2 comprises the concept of “generating a fourth transaction configured to: spend the first virtual object; and generate a second virtual object representing a second state of the game; and transmitting the fourth transaction to the second node.”
Claim 6 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 8 of U.S. Patent No. 12,387,205 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because every limitation in instant claim 6 have a similarly-worded limitation in claim 8 of US Patent 12,387,205 B2. For example, claim 8 in 12,387,205 B2 comprises the concept of “wherein transmitting the fourth transaction comprises transmitting the fourth transaction to the second node in response to reception of a token permission to advance a state of the game.”
Claim 7 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 4 of U.S. Patent No. 12,387,205 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because every limitation in instant claim 7 have a similarly-worded limitation in claim 4 of US Patent 12,387,205 B2. For example, claim 4 in 12,387,205 B2 comprises the concept of “wherein generating the transaction comprises: cryptographically signing the second transaction as an updated second transaction; and wherein transmitting the second transaction comprises transmitting the updated transaction to the distributed network for inclusion in the second block of the blockchain.”
Claim 8 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 5 of U.S. Patent No. 12,387,205 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because every limitation in instant claim 8 have a similarly-worded limitation in claim 5 of US Patent 12,387,205 B2. For example, claim 5 in 12,387,205 B2 comprises the concept of “spend the state channel object associated with the target virtual object representing: a third sub object representing the third amount of the asset for the first node; and a fourth sub object representing the fourth amount of the asset for the second node; generate the third blockchain object based on the third sub object; and generate the fourth blockchain object based on to the fourth sub object.”
Claim 9 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 6 of U.S. Patent No. 12,387,205 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because every limitation in instant claim 9 have a similarly-worded limitation in claim 6 of US Patent 12,387,205 B2. For example, claim 6 in 12,387,205 B2 comprises the concept of “spend the first blockchain object; spend the second blockchain object; trigger a launcher object to generate an announcement representing a first spend of the first blockchain object and a second spend of the second blockchain object; and generate the state channel object in response to the announcement.”
Claim 10 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 10 of U.S. Patent No. 12,387,205 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because every limitation in instant claim 10 have a similarly-worded limitation in claim 10 of US Patent 12,387,205 B2. For example, claim 10 in 12,387,205 B2 comprises the concept of “wherein generating the first transaction comprises generating the first transaction configured to generate an unroll object defining a timeout duration; and wherein generating the second transaction comprises generating the third transaction configured to: spend the unroll object and the state channel object associated with the target virtual object; and trigger the unroll object to generate the third blockchain object and the fourth blockchain object in response to expiration of the timeout duration.”
Claim 11 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 11 of U.S. Patent No. 12,387,205 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because every limitation in instant claim 11 have a similarly-worded limitation in claim 11 of US Patent 12,387,205 B2. For example, claim 11 in 12,387,205 B2 comprises the concept of “spend the state channel object associated with the target virtual object generated in a target transaction, the target transaction: configured to generate the target virtual object defining a target parity; and defining a target sequence number; and trigger the unroll object to generate the third blockchain object and the fourth blockchain object based on the target parity and the target sequence number.”
Claim 12 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 12 of U.S. Patent No. 12,387,205 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because every limitation in instant claim 12 have a similarly-worded limitation in claim 12 of US Patent 12,387,205 B2. For example, claim 12 in 12,387,205 B2 comprises the concept of “wherein generating the first transaction comprises generating the first transaction configured to generate a referee object configured to verify a rule violation; and wherein generating the second transaction comprises generating the second transaction configured to: spend the referee object and the state channel object associated with the target virtual object; trigger the referee object to generate an assertion in response to verification of the rule violation based the target state of the game; and generate the third blockchain object and the fourth blockchain object in response to the assertion.”
Claim 13 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 12 of U.S. Patent No. 12,387,205 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because every limitation in instant claim 13 have a similarly-worded limitation in claim 12 of US Patent 12,387,205 B2. For example, claim 12 in 12,387,205 B2 comprises the concept of “generate the referee object defining a validation program; and wherein generating the second transaction comprises generating the second transaction configured to trigger the referee object to generate the assertion in response to verification of the rule violation based on the validation program and the target state of the game.”
Claim 14 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 13 of U.S. Patent No. 12,387,205 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because every limitation in instant claim 14 have a similarly-worded limitation in claim 13 of US Patent 12,387,205 B2. For example, claim 13 in 12,387,205 B2 comprises the concept of “wherein generating the second transaction comprises generating the second transaction configured to generate a fifth blockchain object representing the target state of the game.”
Claim 15 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 15 of U.S. Patent No. 12,387,205 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because every limitation in instant claim 15 have a similarly-worded limitation in claim 15 of US Patent 12,387,205 B2. For example, claim 15 in 12,387,205 B2 comprises the concept of “wherein generating the second transaction comprises generating the second transaction: defining a puzzle associated with the state channel object; and configured to spend the state channel object via execution of the puzzle according to the target virtual object.”
Claim 16 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 16 of U.S. Patent No. 12,387,205 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because every limitation in instant claim 16 have a similarly-worded limitation in claim 16 of US Patent 12,387,205 B2. For example, claim 16 in 12,387,205 B2 comprises the concept of “spend a first blockchain object: associated with the first node; and representing a first amount of an asset for a game; spend a second blockchain object: associated with the second node; and representing a second amount of the asset for the game; and generate a state channel object associated with an initial virtual object representing: an initial state of the game; the first amount of the asset; and the second amount of the asset; based on a first signature associated with the first node, cryptographically signing the first transaction as an updated first transaction; and transmitting the updated first transaction to a distributed network for inclusion in a first block of a blockchain.”
Claim 17 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 12 of U.S. Patent No. 12,387,205 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because every limitation in instant claim 17 have a similarly-worded limitation in claim 12 of US Patent 12,387,205 B2. For example, claim 12 in 12,387,205 B2 comprises the concept of “wherein accessing the first transaction comprises accessing the first transaction configured to generate a referee object configured to verify a rule violation; and further comprising: generating a second transaction configured to: spend the referee object and the state channel object associated with a target virtual object representing a target state of the game, a third amount of the asset associated with the first node, and a fourth amount of the asset associated with the second node; trigger the referee object to generate an assertion in response to verification of the rule violation based on the target state of the game; and in response to the assertion: generate a third blockchain object associated with the first node and representing the third amount of the asset; and generate a fourth blockchain object associated with the second node and representing the fourth amount of the asset; and transmitting the second transaction to the distributed network for inclusion in a second block of the blockchain.”
Claim 18 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 18 of U.S. Patent No. 12,387,205 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because every limitation in instant claim 18 have a similarly-worded limitation in claim 18 of US Patent 12,387,205 B2. For example, claim 18 in 12,387,205 B2 comprises the concept of “generating a second transaction configured to: spend the unroll object and the state channel object associated with a target virtual object representing a target state of the game, a third amount of the asset associated with the first node, and a fourth amount of the asset associated with the second node; and in response to expiration of the timeout duration, trigger the unroll object to: generate a third blockchain object associated with the first node and representing the third amount of the asset; and generate a fourth blockchain object associated with the second node and representing the fourth amount of the asset.”
Claim 19 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,387,205 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because every limitation in instant claim 19 have a similarly-worded limitation in claim 1 of US Patent 12,387,205 B2. For example, claim 1 in 12,387,205 B2 comprises the concept of “generating a first transaction configured to: spend a state channel object associated with a target virtual object representing: a target state of a game; a first amount of an asset associated with the first node; and a second amount of the asset associated with a second node; generate a first blockchain object associated with the first node and representing the first amount of the asset; and generate a second blockchain object associated with the second node and representing the second amount of the asset; and transmitting the first transaction to a distributed network for inclusion in a first block of the blockchain.”
Claim 20 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 2 of U.S. Patent No. 12,387,205 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because every limitation in instant claim 20 have a similarly-worded limitation in claim 2 of US Patent 12,387,205 B2. For example, claim 2 in 12,387,205 B2 comprises the concept of “spend a third blockchain object associated with the first node and representing a third amount of an asset for the game; spend a fourth blockchain object associated with the second node and representing a fourth amount of the asset for the game; and generate the state channel object associated with an initial virtual object representing an initial state of the game, the third amount of the asset, and the fourth amount of the asset; and transmitting the second transaction to the distributed network for inclusion in a second block of the blockchain, the second block preceding the first block in the blockchain.”
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: As per claim 1, the closest prior art of record, Chinese Patent No. CN110064202 to Peng teaches a game method, game equipment and a storage medium, and belongs to the technical field of block chains. The method comprises the steps that a game terminal sends a signal for preparing to play a game to a first server, the first server matches a plurality of game terminals after receiving the signal for preparing to play the game, the first server constructs a game transaction by using the address of the matched game terminal, game information of a local game and a game contract address, sends the game transaction to a block chain node for consensus, records the game transaction on the block chain, and the block chain node executes the game transaction, triggers the game contract to execute to obtain a game state and a game result and stores the game state and the game result in a database of the block chain node; the game terminal synchronizes the game state and the game result from the tile link points. Aiming at the technical problems that most blockchain games have long waiting time for a player to start the game and poor real-time experience of the game; by adopting the technical scheme of the application, the player can quickly start the game. In addition, United States Patent Application No. 20220201071 to Gaur teaches a processor may collect, from a first peer, a first data set associated with a channel. The channel may include one or more assets associated with a first peer. The channel may link the first peer to a second peer. The processor may analyze the first data set to determine a first status for the one or more assets. The processor may provide the first status of the one or more assets in a viewable channel to the blockchain network. In addition, United States Patent Application No. 20250045751 to Minaei Bidgoli teaches a hub computer receives, from a first computer, a sender message comprising a promise corresponding to a transaction comprising a promise type, an amount, a first verification key associated with the first computer, computer code, and a digital signature. The hub computer verifies the promise by at least verifying the digital signature using the first verification key, verifying that the amount is less than a first computer amount, and verifying that the hub computer is able to process the promise type. The hub computer executes the computer code to perform the transaction. In addition, United States Patent Application No. 20220100735 to Poddey teaches a method for operating a decentralized application by users of a blockchain. In the method, a first user proposes a state change on a state channel anchored in a blockchain. If a confirmation of the state change by the other users on the state channel does not occur, the first user prompts the other users to confirm within a predefined time span on the blockchain. If the confirmation also does not occur on the blockchain, the state change is carried out at the blockchain. In addition, United States Patent Application No. 20210334796 to He teaches a blockchain-based data processing method, a device, and a medium. The method includes: sending a first channel closing message on a chain-off channel; receiving a second signature in a second state and a second channel closing message that are sent on the off-chain channel, where the second signature is obtained by signing the second channel closing message; and signing a third channel closing message to obtain a first signature in the second state, and sending the first signature. This application can ensure transaction security and improve a transaction processing capability. In addition, Chinese Patent Application No. 114629735 to Chen teaches a state interaction method, a state interaction device, state interaction equipment and a state interaction medium based on a multi-party state channel. The state interaction method based on the multi-party state channel comprises the following steps: acquiring participant nodes, and creating a hierarchical multi-party state channel according to each participant node; through a leader node in a participant node, when detecting that a target state channel where the participant node is located generates new target state data, performing signature interaction with each member node in the target state channel to generate aggregated signature data; the aggregated signature data and the target state data are sent to each member node through a target state channel through the leader node; and after determining that the aggregated signature data and the target state data are received, updating the local state data by using the target state data through member nodes in the participant nodes. According to the technical scheme of the embodiment of the invention, on the premise of saving the state storage space, the speed of state generation is accelerated, and the throughput of the block chain is improved.
The closest prior art of record fail to teach or suggest, in the context of the ordered combination of the claim, generate a state channel object associated with an initial virtual object representing an initial state of the game, the first amount of the asset, and the second amount of the asset; based on a first signature associated with the first node, cryptographically signing the first transaction as an updated first transaction; and transmitting the updated first transaction to a distributed network for inclusion in a first block of a blockchain; generating a second transaction configured to: spend the state channel object associated with a target virtual object representing a target state of the game, a third amount of the asset associated with the first node, and a fourth amount of the asset associated with the second node; generate a third blockchain object associated with the first node and representing the third amount of the asset; and generate a fourth blockchain object associated with the second node and representing the fourth amount of the asset; and transmitting the second transaction to the distributed network for inclusion in a second block of the blockchain.
Claims 2-15 are dependent on claim 1 and contain allowable subject matter for the same reasons stated above. In addition, claim 16 is analogous to claim 1, and thus contains allowable subject matter for the same reasons stated above. Claims 17-18 are dependent on claim 16 and contain allowable subject matter for the same reasons stated above. In addition, claim 19 is analogous to claim 1, and thus contains allowable subject matter for the same reasons stated above. Claim 20 is dependent on claim 19 and contain allowable subject matter for the same reasons stated above.
A terminal disclaimer may be effective to overcome a nonstatutory double patenting rejection over U.S. Patent No. 12,307,491 B2 and U.S. Patent No. 11,880,808 B2 (37 CFR 1.321(b) and (c)).
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 will determine what form 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to COURTNEY JONES whose telephone number is (469)295-9137. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:30 am - 5:30 pm CST (M-Th).
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 Patel can be reached at (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 an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/COURTNEY P JONES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3699