DETAILED ACTION
Acknowledgments
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This action is in reply to the application filed on 07/31/2025.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been examined.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-patent eligible subject matter because the claim(s) as a whole, considering all claim elements both individually and in combination, do not amount to significantly more than an abstract idea.
Step 1:
The claims recite a process, system, apparatus, article of manufacture, and/or a nontransitory storage medium with instructions, each of which are proper statutory categories.
Step 2A (prong 1):
Claim 1 (representative of claims 8 and 15):
The claim limitations are grouped as shown immediately following:
identifying a plurality of cryptographic non-fungible tokens (NFTs) on a distributed blockchain ledger; (Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity - business relations or managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people including following rules or instructions)
associating, by instrument administration circuitry, an instrument with the plurality of cryptographic NFTs; (Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity - business relations or managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people including following rules or instructions)
(Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity - business relations or managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people including following rules or instructions)
determining, by the instrument administration circuitry, a value of the plurality of cryptographic NFTs based on one or more sets of transaction data on the distributed blockchain ledger that are associated with one or more of the plurality of cryptographic NFTs; (Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity - business relations or managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people including following rules or instructions)
monitoring, by the instrument administration circuitry, the distributed blockchain ledger to detect transaction data of a block of the distributed blockchain ledger, the transaction data indicative of a transaction associated with a first cryptographic NFT of the plurality of cryptographic NFTs; (Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity - business relations or managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people including following rules or instructions)
determining, by the instrument administration circuitry, a modified value of the plurality of cryptographic NFTs responsive to detection of the transaction data; (Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity - business relations or managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people including following rules or instructions)
terminating the instrument associated with the plurality of cryptographic NFTs in response to a comparison of the modified value to a predetermined threshold value indicating that the modified value is less than the predetermined threshold value; (Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity - business relations or managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people including following rules or instructions)
creating a digital record on the distributed blockchain ledger representing the instrument associated with the plurality of cryptographic NFTs, wherein the digital record comprises metadata associated with the instrument, the metadata comprising a plurality of risk characteristics of the instrument associated with the plurality of cryptographic NFTs. (Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity - business relations or managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people including following rules or instructions)
Additional dependent claims do not appear remedy the deficiency.
Step 2A (prong 2):
Claim 1 (representative of claims 8 and 15):
… instrument administration circuitry
… an apparatus
…a memory
…a processing device
These remaining claim limitations are delineated as shown immediately preceding. The abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application. There are no improvements to the functioning of a computer, other technology or technical field, a particular machine is not cited, nothing is transformed to a different state or thing, the abstract idea is not more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the abstract idea. The claim merely uses a computer as a tool to perform the abstract idea, which is generally linked to a particular field of use, in this case, marketing and advertising. Thus, these limitations are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor and memory performing a generic computer function of processing and storing data) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component – MPEP 2106.05(f). Further, receiving data, evaluating data and distributing data are data gathering and data outputting, which has no effect on technology and does no more than generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP 2106.05(h).
Step 2B:
The claim limitations do not provide an Inventive Concept. The claim limitations do not recite additional elements that amount to significantly more that the abstract idea because the additional elements of the system comprising a computer processor, computer readable storage medium with instructions, and a memory configured to store information, each recited at a high level of generality in a computer network which only perform the universal computer functions of accessing, receiving, storing, and processing data, transmitting and presenting information. Taking the elements both individually and as an ordered combination, the function performed by the computer at each step of the process is purely orthodox. Using a computer to obtain and display data are some of the most basic functions of a computer. As shown, the individual limitations claimed are some of the most rudimentary functions of a computer. The technical solution described in this invention does not alter hardware structure or its routine, does not transform the character of the information being processed, does not identify a novel source or type of data, does not advance the functionality of a computer as a tool, and does not incorporate specific rules enabling the computer to accomplish innovative utilities. In summary, the individual step and/or component does no more than require a general computer to perform standard computer functions. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of a computer devices amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component - requiring the use of software to tailor information and provide it to the user on a generic computer, Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Bank (USA), 792 F.3d 1363, 1370-71, 115 USPQ2d 1636, 1642 (Fed. Cir. 2015).
Double Patenting
A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957).
A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-15 of U.S. Patent No. 12,400,221 B1, hereinafter the ‘221 patent. This is a statutory double patenting rejection.
CONCLUSION
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Non-Patent Literature:
PWC. “Crypto Assets.” (November 2022). Retrieved online 10/23/2024. https://viewpoint.pwc.com/dt/us/en/pwc/accounting_guides/crypto-assets-guide/assets/pwccryptoassetsguide1122.pdf
Technical Line. “Accounting for digital assets, including crypto assets.” (30 June 2022) . Retrieved online 10/23/2024. https://www.ey.com/content/dam/ey-unified-site/ey-com/en-us/technical/accountinglink/documents/ey-tl16494-221us-06-30-2022.pdf
BINANCE. “What Is Rebalancing Bot and Frequently Asked Questions.” (2023-01-04).
Retrieved online 02/24/2025. https://www.binance.com/en/support/faq/detail/29bbbd2e7fc24085be7a8a7d02779457
Foreign Art:
SLIWKA et al. “Distributed Ledger Lending Systems Having A Smart Contract Architecture And Methods Therefor.” (WO 2021/062160 A1)
QUIGLEY et al. “Method For Minting, Crafting, And Unboxing Digital Tokens By Minting Smart Contract Stored On Distributed Ledger, Involves Receiving Set Of Schemas And Templates For Collection Of Collectible Non-fungible Tokens By Minting Smart Contract.” (WO 2022/178096 A1)
KIKINIS et al. “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR SECURE STORAGE OF DIGITAL ASSETS TO FACILITATE ELECTRONIC TRANSACTIONS.” (WO 2020/014551 A1)
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to James A. Reagan (james.reagan@uspto.gov) whose telephone number is 571.272.6710. The Examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday from 9 AM to 5 PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s supervisor, John Hayes, can be reached at 571.272.6708.
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 http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal/pair . Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866.217.9197 (toll-free).
Any response to this action should be mailed to:
Commissioner for Patents
PO Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
or faxed to 571-273-8300.
Hand delivered responses should be brought to the United States Patent and Trademark Office Customer Service Window:
Randolph Building
401 Dulany Street
Alexandria, VA 22314.
/JAMES A REAGAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3697
james.reagan@uspto.gov
571.272.6710 (Office)
571.273.6710 (Desktop Fax)
Prosecution Insights