DETAILED ACTION
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This Office action is in response to Applicant’s communication filed on October 14, 2025. Claims 1-20 are pending and have been examined. The objections to the drawings, the claim interpretation, and the rejections are stated below.
Drawings
2. The drawings filed by the applicants on October 14, 2025 are objected to by the Examiner. Specifically, drawings of Figures 6A-10 are not clear. Formal replacement legible drawings are required in the response to this Office action. Note: Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
Claim Interpretation
3. Claim 1 recites “A method, comprising:
calculating an amount of lifetime income;
sending the amount of lifetime income to one of the investor, the financial advisor, or the insurance company;
sending notification to trustee to issue income reference units (IRUs) through a clearing house;
creating pledged shares associated with an investor and investor profile;
sending the pledged share information to a broker, wherein the pledged share information is associated with the pledged shares; and
sending the investor profile, the IRUs, and the pledged share information to an insurer”. It is not clear if these steps of the claim are performed manually and or by a computer processor. Similar ambiguities are also present in the dependent claims 2-7. Appropriate correction/clarification is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
4. 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.
5. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
The claims recite a method/apparatus of sending the investor profile, the income reference units (IRUs), and the pledged share information to an insurer, which is considered a judicial exception because it falls under the category of “Certain Methods of organizing human activity” such as fundamental economic practice as well as commercial or legal interactions including agreements as discussed below. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application as discussed below. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception as discussed below.
Analysis
Step 1: In the instant case, exemplary claim 8 is directed to an apparatus.
Step 2A – Prong One: The limitations of “An apparatus comprising:
one or more processors; and
a memory storing processor-executable instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the apparatus to:
calculate an amount of lifetime income;
send the amount of lifetime income to one of the investor, the financial advisor, or the insurance company;
send notification to a trustee to issue income reference units (IRUs) through a clearing house;
create pledged shares associated with an investor and an investor profile;
send pledged share information to a broker, wherein the pledged share information is associated with the pledged shares; and
send the investor profile, the IRUs, and the pledged share information to an insurer” as drafted, when considered collectively as an ordered combination without the italicized portions, is a process that, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, covers the category of “Certain Methods of organizing human activity” such as fundamental economic practice as well as commercial or legal interactions including agreements.
The steps of “calculating an amount of lifetime income;
sending the amount of lifetime income to one of the investor, the financial advisor, or the insurance company;
sending notification to trustee to issue income reference units (IRUs) through a clearing house;
creating pledged shares associated with an investor and investor profile;
sending the pledged share information to a broker, wherein the pledged share information is associated with the pledged shares; and
sending the investor profile, the IRUs, and the pledged share information to an insurer” is a fundamental economic practice such as providing information to an insurer. Also these steps considered collectively is fulfilling agreements between the user and the insurer. Hence, the steps of the claim, considered collectively as an ordered combination without the italicized portions, covers the abstract category of “Certain Methods of organizing human activity”.
That is, other than, one or more processors and a memory storing processor-executable instructions, nothing in the claim precludes the steps from being performed as a method of organizing human activity. If the claim limitations, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, covers methods of organizing human activity but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Step 2A – Prong Two: The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim only recites the additional elements of one or more processors and a memory storing processor-executable instructions to perform all the steps. A plain reading of Figures 1-11 and associate descriptions in the Specification reveals that the one or more processors comprises generic processors suitably programmed to execute the claimed steps. The memory storing processor-executable instructions is a generic computer memory suitably programmed to store the associated information. Hence, the additional elements in the claims are all generic components suitably programmed to perform their respective functions. The additional elements in all the steps are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as generic computer components performing generic computer functions) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Accordingly, these 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. Hence, claim 8 is directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B: The claim does 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, using the additional elements (identified above) to perform the claimed steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. The additional elements of the instant underlying process, when taken in combination, together do not offer substantially more than the sum of the functions of the elements when each is taken alone. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. Hence, independent claim 8 is not patent eligible. Independent claims 1 and 15 are also not patent eligible based on similar reasoning and rationale.
Dependent claims 2-7, 9-14 and 16-20, when analyzed as a whole are held to be patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the additional recited limitations only refine the abstract idea further.
For instance, in claims 2, 9, and 16, the steps “further comprising receiving at least one of personally identifiable information (PII), cost basis data on shares to be pledged, and income choice” under the broadest reasonable interpretation, are further refinements of methods of organizing human activity because these steps describe the intermediate steps of the underlying process.
In claims 3, 10, and 17, the steps “wherein calculating the amount of lifetime income is based on the at least one of the PII, the cost basis data on the shares to be pledged, and the income choice” under the broadest reasonable interpretation, are further refinements of methods of organizing human activity because these steps describe data used in the intermediate steps of the underlying process.
In claims 4, 11, and 18, the steps “wherein creating the pledged shares associated with the investor and the investor profile is further based on the at least at least one of the PII, the cost basis data on the shares to be pledged, and the income choice” under the broadest reasonable interpretation, are further refinements of methods of organizing human activity because these steps describe the intermediate steps of the underlying process.
In claims 5, 12, and 19, the steps “further comprising preparing to generate the pledged shares and the IRUs” under the broadest reasonable interpretation, are further refinements of methods of organizing human activity because these steps describe the intermediate steps of the underlying process.
In claims 6, and 13, the steps “wherein preparing to generate the pledged shares and the IRUs further comprises:
calculating a number of IRUs based on a calculated amount of lifetime income; and
establishing a connection to the trustee through the clearing house” under the broadest reasonable interpretation, are further refinements of methods of organizing human activity because these steps describe the intermediate steps of the underlying process.
In claim 7, the step “wherein the pledged shares are represented as one or more tokens offered over a blockchain” under the broadest reasonable interpretation, is a further refinement of methods of organizing human activity because this step describes the pledged shares used in the intermediate steps of the underlying process.
In claims 14, and 20, the steps “wherein calculating the amount of the lifetime income is based on an amount associated with the pledged shares” under the broadest reasonable interpretation, are further refinements of methods of organizing human activity because these steps describe the intermediate steps of the underlying process.
In all the dependent claims, the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the limitations are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Also, the claims do not affect an improvement to another technology or technical field; the claims do not amount to an improvement to the functioning of a computer system itself; the claims do not affect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing; and the claims do not move beyond a general link of the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment. In addition, the dependent claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The additional elements of the instant underlying process, when taken in combination, together do not offer substantially more than the sum of the functions of the elements when each is taken alone. The claims as a whole, do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. For these reasons, the dependent claims also are not patent eligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
6. 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 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.
7. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b) (2) (C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a) (2) prior art against the later invention.
8. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
9. Claim(s) 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Galterio; Louis (US Pub. 2024/0070627 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 8 and 15, Galterio discloses a method, an apparatus and one or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing processor-executable instructions that, when executed by at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to perform the method comprising: calculating an amount of lifetime income; sending the amount of lifetime income to one of the investor, the financial advisor, or the insurance company (CMS restrictions such as minimum beneficiary target population and strict geographic boundary definitions, make some ACO's more challenging to form and operate at agreed upon targets. Investors may find that by taking newer model ACO's and instead investing their funds into local, private, and specialty based groups, partial returns of investment income streams can be an annuity that guarantees a return of the original portion of the investment early in the funding cycle, para [0659]);
sending notification to trustee to issue income reference units (IRUs) through a clearing house (National competent authorities involved with notified bodies address regulatory compliance; conformity of compliance requirements; scope borderlines-classifications; and safety and performance requirements, para [0498]);
creating pledged shares associated with an investor and investor profile (The UNIT Network is one of the key systems that the healthcare cryptosystem interfaces with. Being a participant of this network allows RHIOTOKEN and our users (including our own Smart Contract generating software and our antenna software oracles) to create and mint tokens, para [0571]);
sending the pledged share information to a broker, wherein the pledged share information is associated with the pledged shares (One party using the repo facility desiring RHIOCOIN of our example ACO can be advanced by distribution of units of the Healthcare Cryptosystem ( or simply US digital US dollars in debit format or CBDC including US Fed Coins, JPMorgan LINK, Circle's issued USDC Cash stablecoin, etc.) in return for pledging the hard asset of a standardized value Diamond or its Bitcarbon crypto token equivalent, para [0707]); and
sending the investor profile, the IRUs, and the pledged share information to an insurer (In a second scenario, there are some organizations known as Clearing Houses. Instead of sending the claim directly to the payer, the provider sends the claim to the intermediary clearinghouse service that charges a fee to insure all contextual data is in the right place for the payer, para [0304]). An apparatus comprising: one or more processors; and a memory storing processor-executable instructions and one or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing processor-executable instructions to perform the method are inherent in the disclosure of Galterio.
Regarding claims 2, 9, and 16, Galterio discloses receiving at least one of personally identifiable information (PII), cost basis data on shares to be pledged, and income choice (Our antenna based identification approach is both physical and virtual. Healthcare identification and regulations against sharing or misusing Protected Health Information (PHI) and Personally Identifiable Information (PII) without consent, is highly protected and a critical aspect of the Healthcare Cryptosystem, para [0477]).
Regarding claims 3, 10, and 17, Galterio discloses wherein calculating the amount of lifetime income is based on the at least one of the PII, the cost basis data on the shares to be pledged, and the income choice (Older patients that may be on fixed incomes many times have their contributions and benefits capped. They are unable to keep up with the price of care demanded by health care providers facing their own challenges in paying for software, para [0208]).
Regarding claims 4, 11, and 18, Galterio discloses wherein creating the pledged shares associated with the investor and the investor profile is further based OB the at least at least one of the PII, the cost basis data on the shares to be pledged, and the income choice (Wrapped crypto tokens, when introduced were used for financial operations. They are cryptocurrencies pegged to the value of another original crypto or assets like gold, stocks, shares, and real estate and work on Decentralized Financial (DeFi) platforms, para [0579]).
Regarding claims 5, 12, and 19, Galterio discloses preparing to generate the pledged shares and the IRUs (As two of the most common approaches to identify strong and weak performing units (regression analysis and DEA), we use these to quantify units of subjective quality with quantitative units. DEA estimates the cost level an efficient entity, such as a firm, that should be able to achieve in particular market, para [0650]).
Regarding claims 6, and 13, Galterio discloses wherein preparing to generate the pledged shares and the IRUs further comprises: calculating a number of IRUs based on a calculated amount of lifetime income; and establishing a connection to the trustee through the clearing house (The ability to communicate to the patient and provider eligibility, optional plans, estimated price of services, etc. using X.12 Clearinghouse Standards, para [0024]).
Regarding claim 7, Galterio discloses wherein the pledged shares are represented as one or more tokens offered over a blockchain (In some embodiments, the apparatus of the present Healthcare Cryptosystem invention comprises linked and encoded SIM cards in 5G mobile phones, in other embodiments the apparatus of the present invention comprises web based portal logins with hyperlinks, and in further embodiments, the apparatus of the present invention comprises linked and encoded SIM and eSIM cards in non 5G mobile cell phones which are also linked to hardware antennae radio devices, and in further embodiments, the apparatus of the present invention comprises blockchain tokens generated by the present invention's smart contracts which are encoded on graphene chip cards and synced to Web3 based distributed networks and file systems using healthcare HL 7 standards, and in further embodiments, the apparatus is comprised of hardware, systems, and methods which in part, can be applicable to the finance industry, para [0107].
Regarding claims 14 and 20, Galterio discloses wherein the processor-executable instructions that calculate the amount of the lifetime income, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the apparatus to calculate the amount of the lifetime income based on an amount associated with the pledged shares (These PoA validation sub-mechanisms (A, B, C, D, E below) are determined by the parties involved (who are also the miners and who receive RHIOCOIN's as shared rewards that are formulae determined within our software, for block completion) and the scenario of the operation, para [0532]).
Conclusion
10. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
(a) Walters; Brian (US Pub. 2018/0108090 A1) discloses exchanged based lifetime income stream by packaging annuities and other guaranteed payments into a pooled fund to be sold and traded as exchange based funds. Two approaches are planned, one with a closed pool of representative annuitants the other with an open pool of actual annuitants. The closed pool will determine the optimal weights of Male/Female and Unisex investments and the appropriate timing to rebalance to the actual annuitants as well as cash management and threshold for capital raises. The open pool will calculate the threshold for capital raises, cash management. Secondary market will supply liquidity through a process of qualifying the investor's health to allow for exchange in the secondary market. A machine based microprocessor with proprietary algorithm will adjust for different aged investors and contract features in the same fund. Exchanges will be through either existing exchanges or a web based bid/ask exchange. Funds can be a combination of single aged participants or multi-aged participants. Process will include the option to use multiple insurers to diversify pool and enhance positioning in marketplace and require the allocation of assets, risk, revenues. Tracking and sharing of information, underwriting, as well as other relevant functions.
(b) Phillips; John (US Pub. 2017/0004580 A1) discloses a computer-implemented method for providing an exchange traded fund comprising the steps of: providing a unit investment trust including a plurality of ownership units, wherein the unit investment trust includes a portfolio of securities composed in accordance with an index; distributing the ownership units of the unit investment trust to one or more investors; providing an exchange traded fund including a plurality of ownership shares; upon the occurrence of a conversion event, tendering the portfolio of securities to the exchange traded fund in return for an in-kind distribution of the plurality of ownership shares; and distributing the plurality of ownership shares to the one or more investors according to a predetermined ratio of ownership units to ownership shares.
11. 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to Narayanswamy Subramanian whose telephone number is (571) 272-6751. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday from 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Abhishek Vyas can be reached at (571) 270-1836. The fax number for Formal or Official faxes and Draft to the Patent Office 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.
/Narayanswamy Subramanian/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3691
July 27, 2026
Prosecution Insights