Patent Application 17693232 - METHODS AND APPARATUSES FOR GENERATING AND

Title: METHODS AND APPARATUSES FOR GENERATING AND PURCHASING A DIGITAL ASSET
Application Information

Invention Title: METHODS AND APPARATUSES FOR GENERATING AND PURCHASING A DIGITAL ASSET
Application Number: 17693232
Submission Date: 2025-04-07T00:00:00.000Z
Effective Filing Date: 2022-03-11T00:00:00.000Z
Filing Date: 2022-03-11T00:00:00.000Z
National Class: 705
National Sub-Class: 051000
Examiner Employee Number: 94925
Art Unit: 3698
Tech Center: 3600
Rejection Summary

102 Rejections: 0
103 Rejections: 2
Cited Patents

The following patents were cited in the rejection:
US 0058636🔗
Office Action Text



    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 .

DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
Acknowledgements
The Amendment of claims 3, filed on 08/12/2024 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-30, are originally filed.
Claims 13-30, are withdrawn.
Claim 5, is cancelled, therefore
Claims 1-4 and 6-12 are hereby examined.

Examiner’s Claim Objection
	Claim 11, is objected to because the claim has a typographical error as indicated in the underline, that needs correction. The claim recites “A apparatus comprising:”
	Applicant is advised to correct the underline as “An apparatus comprising:”

Examiner’s Comments 
Applicant is advised that the Notice of Allowance mailed 02/10/2025 is vacated. If 
the issue fee has already been paid, applicant may request a refund or request that the fee be credited to a deposit account. However, applicant may wait until the application is either found allowable or held abandoned. If allowed, upon receipt of a new Notice of Allowance, applicant may request that the previously submitted issue fee be applied. If 
abandoned, applicant may request refund or credit to a specified Deposit Account.
Prosecution on the merits of this application is reopened on claim 1-4 and 6-12 considered unpatentable for the reasons indicated below:
	This application is reopened based on the Notice of Withdrawal mailed out on 03/20/2025, the realization that this application is directed to an abstract idea of a 35 USC § 101 rejection that was not addressed during the prosecution cycle of this application. Additionally, there is a prior art rejection for these application, therefore, this communication is a Non-Final Office Action rejection on the merits, as per MPEP 1308.01, the Allowance mailed out on 11/27/2024 is hereby withdrawn

Examiner’s Response to Amendment/Remarks 
35 USC § 103
The applicant’s remarks/response in the Non-Final filed on 08/12/2024 is hereby acknowledged and found not persuasive. As disclosed in pages 10-13 of the Applicant’s response filed on 08/12/2024, Examiner discloses that, in response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). The combination of Yantis in view of Miller teaches these elements as disclosed, below. 
Regarding the assertion by the Applicant in pages 13-14 that “the Office Action’s conclusion of obviousness is based on improper hindsight reasoning” Examiner respectfully disagrees as “generating a digital asset for purchase by a user, and combining the functionality of rendering the digital asset” is a well-known features using such well-known computer technologies, within the level of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention, therefore, Examiner disagrees with the “improper hindsight reasoning” argument. Listed below, are examples of additional prior art that refute applicant’s assertion that combining Yantis and Miller is based on improper hindsight reasoning:
Dunkeld (US 20030110126 A1) - ¶ 0163 
Knowlton (US 20060259386 A1) Fig. 1 – relates to description contemplate digital assets being used in different platforms, which are all part of the same “location” file in a NameSpace database:
Cote-Charpentier (US 20070178968 A1) - ¶ 0065
Larson (US 20120236201 A1) - ¶ 0778
Pacey (US 20150024852 A1) - ¶¶ 0070, 0107, 0123
Iyer (US 20160373804 A1) ¶ 0004
Cabanero (US Pat 10217185) – “In some embodiments, the MU system 110 may store digital assets representing many versions, views, or renditions of various characters or objects within the world of the media universe in repository 116, and asset tracking 112 may maintain information describing each of the digital assets. For example, digital assets representing various versions…”
Knight (US 20190299105 A1) ¶¶ 0027, 0075
Kock (US Pat. 10850202) - “....The rights may include ownership rights, distribution rights, and/or other rights. For example, particular recorded rights may reflect ownership of a particular digital asset by a particular user. For example, the particular digital asset may be not fungible, and may represent a three-dimensional in-game user-controllable character that can interact with other virtual items within online gaming platform 105…”
Meilich (US Pat. 10946283) – “The player may create a vault account and interact with their vault via a computer implemented software application that includes a graphical user interface. The graphical user interface(s) may include at least one UI that represents digital assets available from one or digital asset marketplaces that are accessible to the vault interface. One or more of the interface(s) may include at least one UI that enables a player to create and/or transact with a player vault account.
Therefore, it is obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, 
to modify Yantis to include the elements of Miller. So, the 103 rejection is hereby maintained.

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 1-4 and 6-12, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
	In the instant case, claims 1-4 and 6-10 are directed to a process (i.e., a method), claim 11 is directed to  a machine (i.e., apparatus), and claim 12 is directed to a product (i.e., a non-transitory computer readable medium), therefore, these claims fall within the four statutory categories of invention. Thus, the eligibility analysis proceeds to Step 2A.1.
	The limitations of independent claim 1, which is representative of independent claims 11 and 12, have been denoted with letters by the Examiner for easy reference. The judicial exceptions recited in claim 1 are identified in bold below:
[A] 	A method for generating a digital asset for purchase by a user, the method comprising: 
[B]	generating a digital asset comprising a plurality of digital files, wherein each digital file of the plurality of digital files includes a digital representation of the digital asset in a respective file format for rendering the digital asset in a respective computing environment; 
[C]	recording information related to the digital asset as a cryptographic token on a decentralized distributed ledger, said information including at least a cryptographic hash representing the digital asset, ownership information associated with the digital asset, and metadata identifying the location of the plurality of digital files associated with the digital asset; 
[D]	receiving a request to purchase the digital asset comprising transaction information identifying the cryptographic token and a digital wallet associated with the user; and 
[E]	transmitting, upon validation of the request, to the digital wallet associated with the user information linking the user with the cryptographic token.
Limitations A-E under the broadest reasonable interpretation covers steps or functions of certain methods of organizing human activity, specifically managing personal/commercial behavior (e.g., generating, recording, receiving a request to purchase, transmitting [e.g., sending]). For example, the disclosure establishes generating and storing a media file [i.e., a digital asset], then entertain a request to buy the medial file and then send it to the requestor after verifying that the wallet of the requestor can pay for it, which is a form of commercial and legal activities, fits squarely within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Therefore, limitations A and E recite at least one abstract idea.
Accordingly, claim 1, recite at least one abstract idea and the analysis proceed to Step 2A.2.
	The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular,
claims 1, recites the additional elements in bold below:
[A] 	A method for generating a digital asset for purchase by a user, the method comprising: 
[B]	generating a digital asset comprising a plurality of digital files, wherein each digital file of the plurality of digital files includes a digital representation of the digital asset in a respective file format for rendering the digital asset in a respective computing environment; 
[C]	recording information related to the digital asset as a cryptographic token on a decentralized distributed ledger, said information including at least a cryptographic hash representing the digital asset, ownership information associated with the digital asset, and metadata identifying the location of the plurality of digital files associated with the digital asset; 
[D]	receiving a request to purchase the digital asset comprising transaction information identifying the cryptographic token and a digital wallet associated with the user; and 
[E]	transmitting, upon validation of the request, to the digital wallet associated with the user information linking the user with the cryptographic token.
[F]	Additionally, claim 11 recites a[n] apparatus comprising: processing circuitry; and a memory, said memory containing instructions executable by said processing circuitry, whereby said apparatus is operative to perform the method according to claim 1.  
[G] 	And also, claim 12 recites a computer program product comprising a non-transitory computer readable medium storing a computer program comprising instructions which, when executed on at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to carry out the method according to claim 1.
The additional elements (“a[n] apparatus comprising: processing circuitry; and a memory, said memory containing instructions executable by said processing circuitry, whereby said apparatus is operative to perform”, “a computer program product comprising a non-transitory computer readable medium storing a computer program comprising instructions which, when executed on at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to carry out”, are no more than a generic computer performing operations to automate the purchase of a digital asset transaction. Also, the additional elements of “a digital representation of the digital asset in a respective file format for rendering the digital asset in a respective computing environment “, a digital file”, “a digital wallet”, “the digital asset as a cryptographic token on a decentralized distributed ledger”), they identify the data to which the abstract idea applies as being “digital” or “electronic,” which is a general link to a technological environment. When the additional elements are considered individually and as an ordered combination, the claim as a whole, amounts to no more than or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer/a decentralized distributed ledger, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. Accordingly, the additional element(s) do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not recite any additional elements indicative of integration into a practical application. Rather, the claim as whole generally links the judicial exception to a technological environment (e.g., “a[n] apparatus comprising: processing circuitry; and a memory, said memory containing instructions executable by said processing circuitry, whereby said apparatus is operative to perform”, “a computer program product comprising a non-transitory computer readable medium storing a computer program comprising instructions which, when executed on at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to carry out”), defined by high level recitations of a computer/a decentralized distributed ledger and the Internet. Additionally, the additional element of (“a digital representation of the digital asset in a respective file format for rendering the digital asset in a respective computing environment “, a digital file”, “a digital wallet”, “the digital asset as a cryptographic token on a decentralized distributed ledger”) which are mere data used for automation of manual processes, such as using a generic computer to process an application for financing a purchase. Therefore, the claim is directed to an abstract idea and the analysis proceeds to Step 2B. 
The additional elements, both individually and as an ordered combination, do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the outcome of the considerations at Step 2B will be the same when the considerations from Step 2A.2 are reevaluated. As discussed under Step 2A.2, the additional element(s) amount to no more than generally link the abstract idea to a technological environment through “instructions” performed by a generic computer. Because those instructions embody the abstract idea, the claim itself is merely a recitation of the abstract idea and an instruction to “apply it” on a computer. This is not enough to provide an inventive 
concept. Therefore, claims 1, 11 and 12 are not patent eligible.
	Dependent claims 2-4, further recites further comprising: storing one or more of the plurality of digital files on a decentralized file storage system; and obtaining, for each of the stored one or more digital files, a unique cryptographic hash; wherein the cryptographic token further includes information referencing the unique cryptographic hash obtained; further comprising: storing one or more of the plurality of digital files to a remote server. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation covers steps or functions of certain methods of organizing human activity, specifically managing personal/commercial behavior. For example, the claims establish storing the digital files in a ledger and assign a unique identifier for each files, which is a form of commercial and legal activities, fits squarely within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas in prong one of Step 2A. The claims do not recite any new additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or that provide significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, claims 2-4 are not patent eligible. 
Dependent claims 6-10, further recites wherein the respective computing environment is an extended reality (XR) environment including one or more of virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR), or mixed reality (MR) applications; wherein the respective computing environment is an augmented reality (AR) overlay over a physical environment; wherein the distributed ledger is a blockchain ledger; wherein the digital wallet is a blockchain- based wallet; wherein the cryptographic token is a non-fungible token (NFT). Under the broadest reasonable interpretation covers steps or functions of certain methods of organizing human activity, specifically managing personal/commercial behavior. For example, the claims establishes that the token is non-fungible and several computing environment resources for the purchase transaction, which is a form of commercial and legal activities, fits squarely within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas in prong one of Step 2A.  As discussed under Step 2A.2, the additional element(s) of “an extended reality (XR) environment including one or more of virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR), or mixed reality (MR) applications, a blockchain ledger, the digital wallet is a blockchain- based wallet; the cryptographic token is a non-fungible token (NFT)” amount to no more than generally link the abstract idea to a technological environment through “instructions” processed or performed by a generic computer. Because those instructions embody the abstract idea, the claim itself is merely a recitation of the abstract idea and an instruction to “apply it” on a computer. This is not enough to provide an inventive concept.
The claims do not include additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or that provide significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, claims 6-10 are not patent eligible. 
 In summary, the dependent claims considered both individually and as an
ordered combination do not provide meaningful limitations to transform the abstract idea
into a patent eligible application of the abstract idea such that the claims amount to
significantly more than the abstract idea itself. The claims do not recite an improvement
to another technology or technical field, an improvement to the functioning of the
computer itself, or provide meaningful limitations beyond generally linking an abstract
idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claims 1-4 and 6-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.

Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103

	In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA  3

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.
	The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.

	Claims 1 and 6-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yantis et al. (US 2022/0058636 A1), in view of Miller et al. (US 20130120368 A1).

	With respect to claims 1 and 11-12, Yantis teaches a method, an apparatus comprising: 
processing circuitry; and a memory, said memory containing instructions executable by said processing circuitry, and a computer program product comprising a non-transitory computer readable medium storing a computer program comprising instructions which, when executed on at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to carry out the method according to claim 1 {Fig. 1 item 160 Node devices, ¶ 0992}, the method comprising:
generating a digital asset comprising a plurality of digital files, wherein each digital file of the plurality of digital files includes a digital representation of the digital asset […] for rendering the digital asset in a respective computing environment {see at least, Abstract, “…The system includes a tokenization system that generates a digital token that corresponds to the item that is cryptographically linked to the virtual representation…” Fig. 13, and ¶ 0006 “…. The method also includes generating a virtual representation of the item based on the item attribute , wherein the virtual representation is a data structure that stores the item attributes…” and also, Fig. 9 item 902-906, Fig. 13, ¶ 0033 “…a method for generating a digital token that uniquely represents an item includes obtaining, by a processing system of a tokenization platform, a unique identifier for a unique unit of the item , generating, by a cryptographic token generation system, a unique digital token includes a set of digital attributes that correspond to the set of item attributes, and cryptographically linking, by a linking system, the unique digital token and the unique identifier for the unique unit of the item such that the unique digital token provides a unique digital representation of the unique unit of the item. The item includes a set of item attributes…”, ¶ 0829 “The present disclosure relates to a tokenization platform that enables the creation of virtual representations of merchandised items, such as goods, services, and/or experiences. As used herein the term “item” may refer to a digital asset… The term virtual item may refer to a virtual representation of a merchandised item” Fig. 15, ¶ 0015 “…The method also includes rendering a virtual reality store environment, wherein the virtual reality store environment provides an interface that allows users to view virtual reality visualizations of available items that are available for transaction and to transact for instances of the available items. The method further includes rendering a virtual reality visualization of an item represented by a virtual representation of the plurality of virtual representations based on the virtual reality content in in the virtual representation, wherein the virtual reality visualization of the item is presented in the virtual reality store environment…”}.
recording information related to the digital asset as a cryptographic token on a decentralized distributed ledger, said information including at least a cryptographic hash representing the digital asset, ownership information associated with the digital asset, and metadata identifying the location of the plurality of digital files associated with the digital asset {¶ 0350 “…a system for handling a set of secure digital tokens , each of which uniquely represents a respective item , includes an interface configured to handle a unique identifier for a unique unit of an item , a cryptographic token generation system that generates a unique digital token that has a set of digital attributes that correspond to the set of item attributes, wherein the unique digital token is cryptographically secure, a cryptographic linking system configured to generate a cryptographically secure, one- to-at-least-one link between the unique digital token generated by the crypto graphic token generation system and the unique identifier for the unique unit of the item, such that the unique digital token provides a unique digital representation of the unique unit of the item, and an ownership record system that provides transfer of ownership of the unique digital token…”, ¶¶ 0351-0353}. 
receiving a request to purchase the digital asset comprising transaction information identifying the cryptographic token and a digital wallet associated with the user {¶ 0848 “…the token may be transmitted directly from the sender's user device 190 (e.g., from the user's digital wallet) to a user device 190 (e.g., smartphone) or account (e.g., email account or messaging application) associated with the intended recipient. Upon initiating the transmission, the digital wallet may transmit a transfer request to the platform 100 and may transmit a copy of the token to the recipient's user device 190 or specified account…”, ¶ 0849 “…the digital wallet may transmit a redeem request to the platform 100. The redeem request may include the token (or an identifier thereof) and a public address of the user (or any other suitable identifier of the user). The platform 100 receives the redeem request and verifies the validity of the token and/or the ownership of the token. Once verified, the user is granted permission to redeem the token…”}, and 
transmitting, upon validation of the request, to the digital wallet associated with the user information linking the user with the cryptographic token {¶¶ 0848-0849 “…the digital wallet may transmit a redeem request to the platform 100. The redeem request may include the token (or an identifier thereof) and a public address of the user (or any other suitable identifier of the user). The platform 100 receives the redeem request and verifies the validity of the token and/or the ownership of the token. Once verified, the user is granted permission to redeem the token. In some scenarios, the user may be redeeming a token corresponding to a digital item (e.g., a gift card, an mp3, a movie, a digital photograph). In these scenarios, the platform 100 may determine a workflow for satisfying the digital item. For example, the platform 100 may request an email address from the user or may look up an email address of the user from the distributed ledger. In this example, the platform 100 may email a link to download the digital item to the user's email account or may attach a copy of the digital item in an email that is sent to the user's email account…”}.  
Yantis discloses rendering a virtual reality visualization of an item, above, but does not explicitly disclose, however, Miller discloses “… a digital representation of the digital asset in a respective file format for rendering the digital asset in a respective computing environment {see at least ¶ 0035 “Models developed using the modeling client 52 may be stored on a computer-readable medium, such as the data storage 36, as data files including model data 54 that conforms to a certain non-image format, e.g., a format that specifies various parameters and attributes of a model rather than a static snapshot of the model…”, ¶ 0041 “… Further, depending on the implementation, the core browser functionality may include rendering images provided in a standard image format such as BMP, JPEG, or GIF, for example, as well as playing back audio files or feeds and displaying video content provided in respective audio and video formats. The user interface of the browser application 120 may allow a user to specify target hosts and resources, view the rendered content, select links, control interactive content, etc.…”}.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art, to modify Yantis to include the elements of Miller. One would have been motivated to do so, in order to present the rendered digital asset in a standard file format.  Furthermore, Yantis discloses generating a digital asset for purchase by a user. Miller is merely relied upon to illustrate the functionality of rendering digital asset in a standard file format in the same or similar context. Because both generating a digital asset for purchase by a user, as well as rendering digital asset in a standard file format are implemented through well-known computer technologies in the same or similar context, combining their features as outlined above using such well-known computer technologies (i.e., conventional software/hardware configurations), would be reasonable, according to one of ordinary skill in the art. Moreover, since the elements disclosed by Yantis, as well as Miller would function in the same manner in combination as they do in their separate embodiments, it would be reasonable to conclude that their resulting combination would be predictable. Accordingly, the claimed subject matter is obvious over Yantis/Miller. 
	
With respect to claim 6, the combination of Yantis in view Miller teaches all the subject matter as disclosed in claim 1 above. 
Furthermore, Yantis discloses wherein the respective computing environment is 
an extended reality (XR) environment including one or more of virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR), or mixed reality (MR) applications {¶ 0015 “…The distributed ledger further stores a plurality of virtual representations of a plurality of respective items, wherein each virtual representation includes virtual reality content to render a virtual reality visualization of the respective item, and for each virtual representation, a set of tokens that respectively correspond to a respective instance of the item represented by the virtual representation, and ownership data of each respective token. The method also includes rendering a virtual reality store environment, wherein the virtual reality store environment provides an interface that allows users to view virtual reality visualizations of available items that are available for transaction and to transact for instances of the available items…”, ¶ 0838}. 

With respect to claim 7, the combination of Yantis in view Miller teaches all the subject matter as disclosed in claim 1 above. 
Furthermore, Yantis discloses, wherein the respective computing environment is an augmented reality (AR) overlay over a physical environment {¶ 0838 “…The virtual representation of the item may include information that identifies the item…  (e.g., virtual reality data, augmented reality data, and the like)…”, ¶ 0882 “…virtual reality content depicting shoes represented in the first side chain 314-1, augmented reality content depicting shoes represented in the first side chain 314-1, and the like. The foregoing is one manner to shard a distributed ledger. The distributed ledger 310 may be sharded in any other suitable manner”}.

With respect to claim 8, the combination of Yantis in view Miller teaches all the subject matter as disclosed in claim 1 above. 
Furthermore, Yantis discloses, wherein the distributed ledger is a blockchain ledger {¶ 0880 “…In embodiments, the distributed ledger 310 is a blockchain (e.g., an Ethereum blockchain comporting to the ETC protocol)”}.  

With respect to claim 9, the combination of Yantis in view Miller teaches all the subject matter as disclosed in claim 1 above. 
Furthermore, Yantis discloses, wherein the digital wallet is a blockchain-based wallet {¶ 0847 “…For example, the user may purchase a token corresponding to the item from the seller via a web interface or application that is provided or supported by the provider of the platform 100. In response to the transaction, the platform 100 may update the distributed ledger to indicate an assignment of the token to the user (e.g., to a wallet associated with an account of the user). In embodiments, a copy of the token may be stored in a digital wallet corresponding to the new owner of the token (e.g., the buyer)”}.  

With respect to claim 10, the combination of Yantis in view Miller teaches all the subject matter as disclosed in claim 1 above. 
Furthermore, Yantis discloses, wherein the cryptographic token is a non-fungible token (NFT) { ¶ 0852 “Tokens may be fungible tokens or non-fungible tokens. Fungible tokens may refer to tokens that are interchangeable. For example, fungible tokens may all have the same identifier. Non-fungible tokens are unique tokens. Non-fungible tokens are transferrable but not interchangeable”}.  

Claims 2-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yantis et al. (US 2022/0058636 A1), in view of Miller et al. (US 20130120368 A1) and further in view of Cohen et al. (US 20200084045 A1).

With respect to claim 2, the combination of Yantis in view Miller teaches all the subject matter as disclosed in claim 1 above, but does not explicitly disclose, however Cohen discloses further comprising: storing one or more of the plurality of digital files on a decentralized file storage system {¶ 0013 “…The blockchain system may include a ledger that is distributed across all of the nodes in the blockchain system (e.g., a distributed ledger). An asset verification component may use the block chain system to store data related to the creation and/or modification of the digital assets…”}, and 
obtaining, for each of the stored one or more digital files, a unique cryptographic hash {¶¶ 0013-0015 “…When a user publishes, creates, stores, etc., a digital asset in the asset verification component, a hash (e.g., a cryptographic hash) of the digital asset is created and the digital asset is signed with the token and/or one or more keys (e.g., a private key of a private/public key pair). The signature establishes proof that the user published the document and the hash helps to ensure the integrity of the document (e.g., allows other users to determine if the document has been modified or tampered with). The hashes and/or public keys may be added to blocks in the ledger (e.g., a distributed ledger) of a blockchain system…}. 
In addition, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, to modify Yantis in view of Miller to include the elements of Cohen. One would have been motivated to do so, in order to have a cryptographic hash of the created digital asset stored in a distributed ledger of a blockchain.  Furthermore, Yantis discloses generating a digital asset for purchase by a user, and Miller discloses rendering digital asset in a standard file format. Cohen is merely relied upon to illustrate the functionality of using a cryptographic hash to establish proof of ownership of the digital asset in the same or similar context. Because both generating a digital asset for purchase by a user, and rendering digital asset in a standard file format as well as using a cryptographic hash to establish proof of ownership of the digital asset are implemented through well-known computer technologies in the same or similar context, combining their features as outlined above using such well-known computer technologies (i.e., conventional software/hardware configurations), would be reasonable, according to one of ordinary skill in the art. Moreover, since the elements disclosed by Yantis in view of Miller, as well as Cohen would function in the same manner in combination as they do in their separate embodiments, it would be reasonable to conclude that their resulting combination would be predictable. Accordingly, the claimed subject matter is obvious over Yantis/Miller/Cohen. 

	With respect to claim 3, the combination of Yantis and Miller in view Cohen teaches all the subject matter as disclosed in claim 1 above, but does not explicitly disclose, however Cohen discloses, wherein the cryptographic token further includes information referencing the unique cryptographic hash obtained {¶¶ 0015, 0026 “In one embodiment, the asset verification component 110 may store the digital assets 141 in the data storage system 140 and may provide an externally accessible URL to allow the general public to access the digital assets…”}. 
In addition, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, to modify Yantis in view of Miller to include the elements of Cohen. One would have been motivated to do so, in order to have access to the cryptographic hash of the created digital asset stored in a distributed ledger of a blockchain.  Furthermore, Yantis discloses generating a digital asset for purchase by a user, and Miller discloses rendering digital asset in a standard file format. Cohen is merely relied upon to illustrate the functionality of providing access to the cryptographic hash to establish proof of ownership of the digital asset in the same or similar context. Because both generating a digital asset for purchase by a user, and rendering digital asset in a standard file format as well as providing access to the cryptographic hash to establish proof of ownership of the digital asset are implemented through well-known computer technologies in the same or similar context, combining their features as outlined above using such well-known computer technologies (i.e., conventional software/hardware configurations), would be reasonable, according to one of ordinary skill in the art. Moreover, since the elements disclosed by Yantis in view of Miller, as well as Cohen would function in the same manner in combination as they do in their separate embodiments, it would be reasonable to conclude that their resulting combination would be predictable. Accordingly, the claimed subject matter is obvious over Yantis/Miller/Cohen. 

With respect to claim 4, the combination of Yantis in view Miller teaches all the subject matter as disclosed in claim 1 above. 
Furthermore, Cohen discloses, further comprising: storing one or more of the plurality of digital files to a remote server {¶ 0021 “Each node 130 includes a ledger 131. The ledger 131 may also be referred to as distributed ledger. A distributed ledger may be a ledger where copies of the ledger are distributed across multiple nodes (e.g., across multiple computing devices)…The data store may be a persistent storage. A persistent storage may be one or more devices that are capable of storing data. A persistent storage may be a local storage unit or a remote storage unit”}.


Conclusion
	The prior art made of record and not relied upon:
1)	(US Pat. 10896412 B2) – Robertson et al., Trustless Physical Cryptocurrency - relates to a physical cryptocurrency comprising a physical medium and an attached processor. The processor may generate a public-private key pair, or, in one embodiment, the public-private key pair may be generated in a secure and auditable manner external to the processor and stored on the processor. 
2)	(US 20210248653 A1) – McKenzie et al., Authentication of Products – relates generally to a systems and methods for authenticating products, such as products from original manufacturers and/or resellers, that provide a trusted and reliable mechanism for buyers and sellers to prove the authenticity of a product and for authenticators to establish an authentication that can be relied on during downstream transactions is provided.
3)	(US 20230327866 A1) – Andon et al., System and Method for providing cryptographically Secured Digital Assets – relates generally to a computerized system and method for authenticating physical retail products and digital design files, and a system and method for promoting brand engagement.	Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VINCENT IDIAKE whose telephone number is (571)272-1284. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri from 10:30AM to 7:30PM ET.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, PATRICK MCATEE, can be reached at telephone number (571)272-1284. 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 for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated-interview-request-air-form.
/VINCENT I IDIAKE/Examiner, Art Unit 3698                                                                                                                                                                                                        /PATRICK MCATEE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3698