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 .
Status of Claims
• Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been examined.
• This action is made Non-FINAL.
• The Examiner would like to note that this application is now being handled by Examiner Raven Yono.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure Statements filed on 08/18/2025 and 10/14/2025 have been considered. Initialed copies of the Form 1449 are enclosed herewith.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because:
the header information (title, inventor, docket number, firm, page) on the top left corner of each figure should be removed.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description:
Reference character 500 of FIG. 5.
Reference character 562 of FIG. 5.
Reference character 618 of FIG. 6.
Reference character 624 of FIG. 6.
Reference character 61 of FIG. 6.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1, at line 3, is grammatically incorrect and is missing a comma after the word “blockchain.” The Examiner recommends amending the claim to recite “receiving, using the processor or via a blockchain, an asset owned by a user;”
Claim 10 recites similar limitations as claim 1 above and is objected to under the same rationale.
Claim 16 recites similar limitations as claim 1 above and is objected to under the same rationale.
Furthermore regarding claim 1, claim 1 recites “transferring, using a network connected payment rail to the user providing liquid capital.” The claim is grammatically incorrect and is missing a comma after the word “rail.” The Examiner recommends amending the claim to recite “transferring, using a network connected payment rail, to the user providing liquid capital.”
Claim 16 recites similar limitations as claim 1 above and is objected to under the same rationale.
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 1-20 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 claim 1, the use of the parenthetical “(payout = asset value – 1st discount – 2nd discount – fees – expenses)” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claims 10 and 16 have similar limitations found in claim 1 above, and therefore are rejected by the same rationale.
The rest of the dependent claims are rejected due to their dependency to a rejected claim.
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 1-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention recites an abstract idea without significantly more. Independent claims 1, 10, 16, and 21 are directed to a method (claims 1 and 21), a system (claim 10), and an apparatus (claim 16). Therefore, on its face, each independent claim 1, 10, 16, and 21 are directed to a statutory category of invention under Step 1 of the Patent Subject Matter Eligibility analysis (see MPEP 2106.03).
Under Step 2A, Prong One of the Patent Subject Matter Eligibility analysis (see MPEP 2106.04), claims 1, 10, 16, and 21 recite, in part, a system, a method, and an apparatus of organizing human activity. Using the limitations in claim 1 to illustrate, the claim recites a method for providing liquidity for financial assets, comprising: receiving an asset owned by a user; in response to accepting the asset, determining, executing a core algorithm, a projected liquidity ratio for one or more liquidity buckets stored; splitting a discount into a first discount and a second discount, wherein the first discount is based on credit risk and valuation risk, wherein the second discount is based on liquidity risk; applying the first discount based on a credit risk profile retrieved; calculating a second discount based on the projected liquidity ratio and using a discount function stored; allocating the asset to one or more liquidity buckets based on what type of liquidity transaction is used, and a set of bucket attributes associated with each liquidity bucket, wherein the liquidity buckets are maintained; transferring to the user providing liquid capital, a capital amount equal to a net asset value of the asset minus the first and second discounts and minus fees and expenses (payout =asset value - ls discount - 2nd discount - fees - expenses); and distributing, using an income-distribution model executed, a return from a pool of managed assets to the user, wherein the pool of managed assets are stored in a digital asset registry accessible by the system.
The limitations, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers fundamental economic principles or practices and commercial and legal interactions (certain methods of organizing human activity), but for the recitation of generic computer components. The claims as a whole recite a method of organizing human activity. The claimed inventions allows for funds being utilized “to provide liquidity to investors, allowing LPs an easy way to exit their positions without the added challenge of finding a counterparty willing to take the opposite side of their trade, or conversely allowing new investors an easy way to invest in private funds. Furthermore, the invention may provide a credible avenue for liquidity suppliers to get stable yields backed by institutional-grade real-world assets. Liquidity suppliers may be anyone with capital in the form of fiat currency, cryptocurrency or securities that may be used for investing in the ALP,” (see Specification at [0029]), and the claimed invention also allows for employing a discount structure based on credit risk and valuation risk (see Specification at [0077], stating: “This segmentation may enable the pool to attract a broader range of capital, accommodating the needs of both risk-averse and more risk-tolerant participants”), which is a fundamental economic principle or practice of mitigating risk and a commercial and legal interaction including sales activities or behaviors. The mere nominal recitation of a server having a processor and a memory coupled over a network do not take the claim out of the methods of organizing human activity grouping. Thus, the claims recite an abstract idea.
Under Step 2A, Prong Two of the Patent Subject Matter Eligibility analysis (see MPEP 2106.04), the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the additional elements of a computer-implemented method, executed on at least one server having a processor and a memory coupled over a network; a system comprising memory and a processor; a computer program product residing on a non-transitory computer-readable medium having a plurality of instructions stored thereon which, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform operations; a blockchain; a database accessible to the at least one server; a networked data store; a network connected payment rail are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function of receiving an asset, determining a project liquidity, calculating and applying a discount, allocating the asset to liquidity buckets, transferring a capital amount, and distributing a return from a pool of managed asset) such that they amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer components (see MPEP 2106.05(f)).
Accordingly, the combination of 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. The claims are directed to an abstract idea.
Under Step 2B of the Patent Subject Matter Eligibility analysis (see MPEP 2106.05), 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 elements in the claims amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using generic computer components cannot provide an inventive concept.
The claims are not patent eligible.
The dependent claims have been given the full two part analysis including analyzing the additional limitations both individually and in combination. The dependent claim(s) when analyzed both individually and in combination are also held to be patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 because for the same reasoning as above and the additional recited limitation(s) fail(s) to establish that the claim(s) is/are not directed to an abstract idea. Dependent claims 2-9, 11-15, and 17-19 simply help to define the abstract idea. The additional limitations of the dependent claim(s) when considered individually and as an ordered combination do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Viewing the claim limitations as an ordered combination does not add anything further than looking at the claim limitations individually. When viewed either individually, or as an ordered combination, the additional limitations do not amount to a claim as a whole that is significantly more than the abstract idea. Accordingly, claims 1-21 are ineligible.
No Prior Art Rejections
Based on the prior art search results, the prior art of record fails to anticipate or render obvious the claimed subject matter of claims 1-21. While some individual features of claims 1-21 may be shown in the prior art of record: no known reference, alone or in combination, would provide the invention of claims 1-21.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20240265438 A1 (“Tessema”) discloses a method, system and product program for Commission agent banking system (CABS-AT) to be adopted by bank to be an agent or to be deployed in full-fledge bank to be an agent for investors or depositors' revolving or non-revolving lending money, which can be physical or digital money, through online or offline banking to entrepreneurs/borrowers or on projects already financed by bank having established loan contractual agreement among the fund sellers/investors and fund buyers/entrepreneurs/borrowers and the agent bank (CABS-AT) itself to collect agreed commission on loan price such as interest rate or loan cost rate or profit rate or trade price rate, which can be spot, future spot or forward, calculated on the remaining loan balance, which will be given to investors and pools loan from banks to rehabilitate or sell to investors applying investors or entrepreneurs/borrowers substitution strategy to transfer credit and liquidity risks to new entrant investors and entrepreneurs/borrowers, insurance or to pledged collaterals and in turn managing the liquidity and credit risks transferred from the agent bank (CABS-AT) and sustain the loan repayments collection excess above the agent bank (CABS-AT)′ commission on loan price into investors' real accounts till loan settlement.
US 20230385965 A1 (“Jacobson”) discloses a property tokenization system comprising a first blockchain network having a first blockchain and a first smart contract, a tokenized real estate platform for tokenizing property to generate a plurality of ownership tokens in the property, a plurality of user devices, and a plurality of digital wallets associated with one or more of the plurality of user devices, the tokenized real estate platform, or the first blockchain network. The plurality of digital wallets is configured for receiving and storing one or more of the plurality of ownership tokens.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAVEN E YONO whose telephone number is (313)446-6606. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8-5PM EST.
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, Bennett M Sigmond can be reached at (303) 297-4411. 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.
/RAVEN E YONO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3694
Prosecution Insights