Office Action 1: Non-Final Rejection (2023-12-01)
Rejection types: 102 - Lack of Novelty, 103 - Obviousness

CLAIMS:
What is claimed is:

1\. An apparatus for delegating a role associated with an NFT using a self-executable data structure, the apparatus comprising:
at least a processor; and
a memory communicatively connected to the at least processor, the memory containing instructions configuring the at least a processor to:
receive a data collection, wherein the data collection comprises a plurality of data objects associated with at least one NFT;
verify at least a usage of the at least one NFT as a function of the data collection;
determine at least a role associated with the at least one NFT; and
generate a self-executable data structure, wherein the self-executable data structure is configured to delegate the at least a role associated with the at least one NFT.

2\. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the data collection comprises information associated with an owner of the at least one NFT.

3\. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein verifying the at least a usage of the at least one NFT comprises generating a verification datum as a function of the data collection.

4\. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein determining the at least a role associated with the at least one NFT comprises utilizing a role designation machine-learning model configured to correlate the at least a usage to a role datum.

5\. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein delegating the at least a role associated with the at least one NFT comprises delegating at least a usage right of the at least one NFT.

6\. The apparatus of claim 5, wherein the at least a usage right comprises a temporary usage right.

7\. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the at least one NFT comprises an NFT selected from the group consisting of a utility NFT, a rental NFT, a fractional NFT, and a governance NFT.

8\. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the self-executable data structure is configured to be executed on a decentralized platform.
9\. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the at least a processor is further configured to analyze the data collection using a decision tree, wherein the decision tree comprises a plurality of nodes.

10\. The apparatus of claim 1, further comprising an interface communicatively connected to the at least a processor, wherein the interface is configured to display the at least one NFT.

11\. A method for delegating a role associated with an NFT using a self-executable data structure, the method comprising:
receiving, by at least a processor, a data collection, wherein the data collection comprises a plurality of data objects associated with at least one NFT;
verifying, by the at least a processor, at least a usage of the at least one NFT as a function of the data collection;
determining, by the at least a processor, at least a role associated with the at least one NFT; and
generating, by the at least a processor, a self-executable data structure, wherein the self-executable data structure is configured to delegate the at least a role associated with the at least one NFT.

12\. The method of claim 11, wherein the data collection comprises information associated with an owner of the at least one NFT.

13\. The method of claim 11, wherein verifying the at least a usage of the at least one NFT comprises generating a verification datum as a function of the data collection.

14\. The method of claim 11, wherein determining the at least a role associated with the at least one NFT comprises utilizing a role designation machine-learning model configured to correlate the at least a usage to a role datum.

15\. The method of claim 11, wherein delegating the at least a role associated with the at least one NFT comprises delegating at least a usage right of the at least one NFT.

16\. The method of claim 15, wherein the at least a usage right comprises a temporary usage right.

17\. The method of claim 11, wherein the at least one NFT comprises an NFT selected from the group consisting of a utility NFT, a rental NFT, a fractional NFT, and a governance NFT.
18\. The method of claim 11, wherein the self-executable data structure is configured to be executed on a decentralized platform.

19\. The method of claim 11, further comprising analyzing, by the at least a processor, the data collection using a decision tree, wherein the decision tree comprises a plurality of nodes.

20\. The method of claim 11 further comprising displaying the at least one NFT using an interface communicatively connected to the at least a processor. 60Attorney Docket No. 1397-012USU1 61Attorney Docket No. 1397-012USU1 62Attorney Docket No. 1397-012USUI

OFFICE 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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA  to pre-AIA ) 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 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-8, 11-13, 15-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Capability-based non-fungible tokens approach for a decentralized AAA framework in IoT by Omar et al. hereafter Omar.
1. Omar discloses an apparatus for delegating a role associated with an NFT using a self-executable data structure, the apparatus comprising:
at least a processor (section 2, it is inherent that devices have a processor); and
a memory communicatively connected to the at least processor (section 2, it is inherent that devices have a memory), the memory containing instructions configuring the at least a processor to:
receive a data collection, wherein the data collection comprises a plurality of data objects associated with at least one NFT (section 4, Access Control Methods; section 6.2 and 6.3, non-fungible capability token structure);
verify at least a usage of the at least one NFT as a function of the data collection (sections 6.2-6.4);
determine at least a role associated with the at least one NFT (sections 6.2-6.4); and
generate a self-executable data structure, wherein the self-executable data structure is configured to delegate the at least a role associated with the at least one NFT (section 6.5).
2. Omar discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the data collection comprises information associated with an owner of the at least one NFT (section 6.2-6.3).
3. Omar discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein verifying the at least a usage of the at least one NFT comprises generating a verification datum as a function of the data collection (section 6.2-6.3).
5. Omar discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein delegating the at least a role associated with the at least one NFT comprises delegating at least a usage right of the at least one NFT (section 6.5).
6. Omar discloses the apparatus of claim 5, wherein the at least a usage right comprises a temporary usage right (section 6.5).
7. Omar discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the at least one NFT comprises an NFT selected from the group consisting of a utility NFT, a rental NFT, a fractional NFT, and a governance NFT (section 2, privileges other devices/users have on the device and what actions they can perform. Thus, it defines the process of policies enforcement by determining the types of activities, resources, or services a device/user is permitted to perform or access (utility); see also section 6.2-6.3).
8. Omar discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the self-executable data structure is configured to be executed on a decentralized platform (section 6).
Claims 11-13 and 15-17 are similar in scope to claims 1-3 and 5-7 and are rejected under similar rationale.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA  to pre-AIA ) 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.
Claim(s) 4 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Omar as applied to claim 1, 11 above, and further in view of Dotan-Cohen et al. (US 2019/0340554) hereafter Dotan-Cohen.
4. Omar discloses the apparatus of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose wherein determining the at least a role associated with the at least one NFT comprises utilizing a role designation machine-learning model configured to correlate the at least a usage to a role datum.  However, in an analogous art, Dotan-Cohen discloses engagement levels and role assignments including determining the at least a role associated with the at least one NFT comprises utilizing a role designation machine-learning model configured to correlate the at least a usage to a role datum (Abstract, para 137, 195).  It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the implementation of Omar with the implementation of Dotan-Cohen in order to reduce resources for content delivery and increase security (para 7).
Claim(s) 9 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Omar as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Claybrook et al. (US 11,109,214) hereafter Claybrook.
9. Omar discloses the apparatus of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the at least a processor is further configured to analyze the data collection using a decision tree, wherein the decision tree comprises a plurality of nodes.  Claybrook discloses client access devices based on assigned roles including analyze data using a decision tree (col 13, 5-27, a deep-learning based algorithm; a neural network; a generalized linear regression algorithm; a random forest algorithm; a support vector machine algorithm; a gradient boosting regression algorithm; a decision tree algorithm; a generalized additive model; evolutionary programming algorithms; Bayesian inference algorithms, reinforcement learning algorithms, and the like). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the implementation of Omar with the implementation of Claybrook in order to identify trends and patterns to evaluate possible outcomes (a natural advantage of machine learning).
Claim(s) 10 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Omar as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Examiner’s Official Notice.
10. Omar discloses the apparatus of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose further comprising an interface communicatively connected to the at least a processor, wherein the interface is configured to display the at least one NFT.  The examiner takes official notice that a display interface was well known at the time of invention.  It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the implementation of Omar with the implementation of examiner’s official notice in order to allow a user to view content.
Conclusion

APPLICANT REBUTTAL: REMARKS
Claims 1-3, 5-13, and 15-20 are pending, with claims 1 and 11 being independent. Claims 1 and 11 are amended. Claims 4 and 14 are canceled.
In taking the foregoing actions, Applicant respectfully submits Applicant is not
necessarily conceding in this application that these claims, as originally presented, are not patentable over the references cited by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) as pertinent ones of the present claim amendments and cancellations are only for facilitating expeditious prosecution. Applicant respectfully reserves the right to pursue any of the prior versions of the claims, any canceled claims and/or other claims in one or more continuing applications and/or at a later date.
Other than any claim amendments discussed further below, claim 1 has also been
amended, as shown above, to correct any noted typographical-type errors, and/or to establish proper antecedent and/or dependency basis, and/or for readability and/or consistency purposes. No new matter has been introduced.
App
licant-Initiated Interview Summary
A telephonic interview ("the interview") regarding the instant matter was conducted on May 28, 2024 between Primary Examiner James R. Turchen and Applicant's representative Khurram Rahman, Registration No. 70,147. Patentability under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103, andpotential claim amendments were discussed. Applicant thanks the Examiner for his time and consideration in conducting the interview.
A tentative agreement was reached that claim 1, as amended herein, is patentably distinguishable over the cited references. However, the Examiner indicated that he would conduct an updated search.
Claim Re
j
ections Under 35 U.S.C.
§
Claims 1-3, 5-8, 11-13 and 15-18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as allegedly being anticipated by non-patent literature document "Capability-Based Non-fungible Tokens Approach for a Decentralized AAA Framework in IoT," 2020, to Omar et al. (hereinafter "Omar"). (Office Action, p. 2). Applicant respectfully traverses these rejections.
In this case, in the interest of advancing prosecution and to further distinguish over the cited art, Applicant has amended claim 1, which is directed to an apparatus for delegating a role associated with an NFT using a self-executable data structure, to recite, (emphasis added):
at least a processor; and
a memory communicatively connected to the at least a processor, the memory
containing instructions configuring the at least a processor to:
receive a data collection, wherein the data collection comprises a plurality of data objects associated with at least one NFT; verify at least a usage of the at least one NFT as a function of the data collection;
determine at least a role associated with the at least one NFT,
wherein determining the at least a role comprises: retrieving training data from a blockchain storage of a data store, wherein the training data comprises a plurality of usage data correlated to a plurality of role data training, iteratively, a role designation machine-learning model as a function of the training data and
determining the at least a role as a function of the at least a usage of the at least one N
F
T using the trained role designation machine-learning model
;
and
generate a self-executable data structure, wherein the self-executable data structure is configured to delegate the at least a role associated with the at least one NFT.
Applicant submits that at least such an arrangement of "determin[ing] at least a role associated with the at least one NFT ... compris[ing] ... retrieving training data from a blockchain storage of a data store, wherein the training data comprises a plurality of usage data correlated to a plurality of role data ... training, iteratively, a role designation machine-learning model as a function of the training data ... and determining the at least a role as a function of the at least a usage of the at least one NFT using the trained role designation machine-learning model" is not disclosed, taught, or even suggested, by Omar. Support for the amendments to claim 1 can be found in the Application-as-originally-filed, for example, support may be found at, at least, at original claim 4 and paragraph numbers [0043]-[0045] and [0047] of the specification. Independent claim 11 has been amended in a manner similar to independent claim 1. In view of the amendments to claims 1 and 11, respective dependent claims 4 and 14 have been canceled, as shown above. No new matter has been introduced.
Omar is directed to distributed and decentralized applications on heterogeneous IoT networks. However, Omar fails to disclose, teach, or even suggest, at least the above claimed
arrangement of "determin[ing] at least a role associated with the at least one NFT ... compris[ing] ... retrieving training data from a blockchain storage of a data store, wherein the training data comprises a plurality of usage data correlated to a plurality of role data ... training, iteratively, a role designation machine-learning model as a function of the training data ... and determining the at least a role as a function of the at least a usage of the at least one NFT using the trained role designation machine-learning model" as recited in amended claim 1.
Applicant notes the Examiner's assertion regarding claims 4 and 14 that U.S. Patent
Appl. Publ. No. 2019/0340554 Al to Dotan-Cohen et al. (hereinafter "Dotan-Cohen") "discloses engagement levels and role assignments including determining the at least a role associated with the at least one NFT comprises utilizing a role designation machine-learning model configured to correlate the at least a usage to a role datum (Abstract, para 137, 195)." (Office Action. p. 5). Applicant respectfully traverses.
In any event, Dotan-Cohen, individually or in combination with Omar, fails to disclose, teach, or even suggest, at least the above claimed arrangement of "determin[ing] at least a role associated with the at least one NFT ... compris[ing] ... retrieving training data from a blockchain storage of a data store, wherein the training data comprises a plurality of usage data correlated to a plurality of role data ... training, iteratively, a role designation machine-learning model as a function of the training data ... and determining the at least a role as a function of the at least a usage of the at least one NFT using the trained role designation machine-learning model" as recited in amended claim 1.
As such, Applicant submits that Omar, and even Dotan-Cohen, individually or in
combination, fail to disclose, teach, or even suggest, each and every element of claim 1 and that claim 1 is thus allowable.
Independent claim 11, as amended, recites limitations analogous or similar to those of independent claim 1 and overcomes this rejection for at least the same reasons as discussed above with reference to claim 1. As such, Applicant submits that claim 11 is also allowable.
Claims 2, 3 and 5-8 depend, directly or indirectly, from claim 1 and claims 12, 13 and 15- 18 depend, directly or indirectly, from claim 11. As discussed above, claims 1 and 11 are patentably distinguishable over Omar, and even Dotan-Cohen, individually or in combination, for at least the reasons discussed above. Accordingly, Applicant respectfully submits that claims
2, 3, 5-8, 12, 13 and 15-18 are patentably distinguishable over Omar, and even Dotan-Cohen, individually or in combination, for at least the reasons discussed above, and because of the unique combinations of limitations recited therein.
Therefore, Applicant respectfully requests reconsideration and withdrawal of all 35 U.S.C. § 102 rejections of the claims.
Claim Re
j
ections Under 35 U.S.C.
Omar /Dotan-Cohen
Claims 4 and 14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as allegedly being unpatentable
over Omar in view of Dotan-Cohen. (Office Action, p. 4). Applicant respectfully traverses these rej ections.
Claims 4 and 14 have been canceled, as shown and also noted above, rendering these rejections now moot.
Omar / Claybrook
Claims 9 and 19 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as allegedly being unpatentable over Omar in view of U.S. Patent No. 11,109,214 Bl to Claybrook et al. (hereinafter "Claybrook"). (Office Action, p. 5). Applicant respectfully traverses these rejections.
Claim 9 depends directly from claim 1 and claim 19 depends directly from claim 11. As discussed above, claims 1 and 11 are patentably distinguishable over Omar for at least the reasons discussed above. Furthermore, Claybrook fails to cure the deficiencies of Omar. Accordingly, Applicant respectfully submits that claims 1 and 11, as amended, and claims 9 and 19, are patentably distinguishable over Omar and Claybrook, individually or in combination, for at least the reasons discussed above, and because of the unique combinations of limitations recited therein.
Therefore, Applicant respectfully requests reconsideration and withdrawal of the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejections of claims 9 and 19. Omar / "Official Notice"
Claims 10 and 20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as allegedly being unpatentable over Omar in view of Examiner's Official Notice. (Office Action, p. 6). Applicant respectfully traverses these rejections.
Claim 10 depends directly from claim 1 and claim 20 depends directly from claim 11. As discussed above, claims 1 and 11 are patentably distinguishable over Omar for at least the reasons discussed above. Furthermore, the asserted Official Notice fails to cure the deficiencies of Omar. Accordingly, Applicant respectfully submits that claims 1 and 11, as amended, and claims 10 and 20, are patentably distinguishable over Omar and the asserted Official Notice for at least the reasons discussed above, and because of the unique combinations of limitations recited therein.
Therefore, Applicant respectfully requests reconsideration and withdrawal of the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejections of claims 10 and 20.
Applicant further submits that the Examiner has taken improper Official Notice to assert the following at page 6 of the Office Action:
Omar discloses the apparatus of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose
further comprising an interface communicatively connected to the at least a
processor, wherein the interface is configured to display the at least one NFT. The
examiner takes official notice that a display interface was well known at the time
of invention. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the implementation of Omar with the
implementation of examiner's official notice in order to allow a user to view
content.
The MPEP states that "[o]fficial notice without documentary evidence to support an
examiner's conclusion is permissible only in some circumstances ... [further] the notice of facts beyond the record which may be taken by the examiner must be 'capable of such instant and unquestionable demonstration as to defy dispute' (citing In re Knapp Monarch Co., 296 F.2d 230, 132 USPQ 6 (CCPA 1961))." (MPEP § 2144.03 (A)). In addition, "[o]fficial notice unsupported by documentary evidence should only be taken by the examiner where the facts asserted to be well-known, or to be common knowledge in the art are capable of instance and unquestionable demonstration as being well-known. (See MPEP § 2144.03 (A)).
The MPEP also states that "[i]t is never appropriate to rely solely on "common
knowledge" in the art without evidentiary support in the record, as the principal evidence upon which a rejection was based." (citing Zurko, 258 F.3d at 1385, 59 USPQ2d at 1697.) (MPEP § 2144.03 (A)) ("[T]he Board cannot simply reach conclusions based on its own understanding or experience-or on its assessment of what would be basic knowledge or common sense. Rather, the Board must point to some concrete evidence in the record in support of these findings." (Id. at
1385-86, 59 USPQ2d at 1697.) As the court held in Zurko, an assessment of basic knowledge and common sense that is not based on any evidence in the record lacks substantial evidence support. (Id. at 1385, 59 USPQ2d at 1697. See alsoArendi v. Apple, 832 F.3d 1355, 119 USPQ2d 1822 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (finding that the Board had not provided a reasoned analysis, supported by the evidence of record, for why "common sense" taught the missing process step."))
The MPEP states that "[i]f applicant adequately traverses the examiner's assertion of
official notice, the examiner must provide documentary evidence in the next office action if the rejection is to be maintained. (See 37 CFR 1.104(c)(2).) (See also Zurko 258 F.3d at 1385, 59 USPQ2d at 1697 ("[T]he Board [or examiner] must point to some concrete evidence in the record in support of these findings" to satisfy the substantial evidence test.")) Applicant submits that it is not appropriate for the Office to simply rely on what is allegedly "known" to create an invention based on an interface communicatively connected to a processor and configured to display at least one NFT. As such, and at least for these additional reasons, Applicant respectfully request withdrawal of the obviousness rejections of claims 10 and 20.
As such, Applicant respectfully requests reconsideration and withdrawal of all 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejections of the claims.
Conclusion

NEXT OFFICE 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 .
Examiner’s Amendment
An examiner’s amendment to the record appears below.  Should the changes and/or additions be unacceptable to Applicant, an amendment may be filed as provided by 37 CFR 1.312. To ensure consideration of such an amendment, it MUST be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee.
Claims
1.(Currently Amended) An apparatus for delegating a role associated with [[an NFT]]a non-fungible token (NFT) using a self-executable data structure, the apparatus comprising:
at least a processor; and
a memory communicatively connected to the at least a processor, the memory containing instructions configuring the at least a processor to:
receive a data collection, wherein the data collection comprises a plurality of data objects associated with at least one NFT;
verify at least a usage of the at least one NFT as a function of the data collection;
determine at least a role associated with the at least one NFT, wherein determining the at least a role comprises:
retrieving training data from a blockchain storage of a data store, wherein the training data comprises a plurality of usage data correlated to a plurality ofr ole data;
training, iteratively, a role designation machine-learning model as a function of the training data; and
determining the at least a role as a function of the at least a usage of the at least one NFT using the trained role designation machine-learning model; and
generate a self-executable data structure, wherein the self-executable datastructure is configured to delegate the at least a role associated with the at least one NFET.
11. (Currently Amended) A method for delegating a role associated with [[an NFT]]a non-fungible token (NFT) using a self-executable data structure, the method comprising:
receiving, by at least a processor, a data collection, wherein the data collection comprises a plurality of data objects associated with at least one NFT;
verifying, by the at least a processor, at least a usage of the at least one NFT as a function of the data collection;
determining, by the at least a processor, at least a role associated with the at least oneNFT, wherein determining the at least a role comprises:
retrieving training data from a blockchain storage of a data store, wherein the training data comprises a plurality of usage data correlated to a plurality of role data;
training, iteratively, a role designation machine-learning model as a function of the training data; and
determining the at least a role as a function of the at least a usage of the at least one NFT using the trained role designation machine-learning model;
generating, by the at least a processor, a self-executable data structure, wherein the self-executable data structure is configured to delegate the at least a role associated with the at least one NFT.
Allowable Subject Matter
Examiner’s Statement of Reasons for Allowance
The following is an examiner’s statement for reasons for allowance:
Independent claims 1 and 11 are allowable based on the remark presented on 5/31/2024 and in view of the claim language.
None of the previously cited closest prior art(s) by Omar and Dotan-Cohen, either singularly or in combination would result in a proper rejection under 35 USC 102 or 103.
All of the cited prior art of record above, whether singularly or in combination, fails to disclose the feature limitation verify at least a usage of the at least one NFT as a function of the data collection; determine at least a role associated with the at least one NFT, wherein determining the at least a role comprises: retrieving training data from a blockchain storage of a data store, wherein the training data comprises a plurality of usage data correlated to a plurality of role data; training, iteratively, a role designation machine-learning model as a function of the training data; and determining the at least a role as a function of the at least a usage of the at least one NFT using the trained role designation machine-learning model; and generate a self-executable data structure, wherein the self-executable data structure is configured to delegate the at least a role associated with the at least one NF.
Additional search does not yield suitable references that reasonably, either singularly or in combination with previous cited references, would result in a proper rejection under 35 USC 102 or 103.
Claims dependent on independent claims are also allowed.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.
Conclusion

CITED REFERENCE SUMMARIES: Ref US20220351165A1: Claims:
A method for creating, maintaining and tracking a cryptographic digital asset tied to physical asset, the method comprising: creating, via a first computing node within a distributed computing network, a digital asset file representative of a respective physical asset in possession of a first party; initializing a digital asset generator to create a blockchain-enabled non-fungible token (NFT) of the digital asset file, wherein the NFT is assigned a unique digital asset identification (ID) code; linking the unique digital asset ID code with a unique user ID code, wherein the unique user ID code is associated with the first party; creating a first transaction block including the unique digital asset code and the unique user ID code, via the first computing node in a distributed blockchain ledger, to record possession of the cryptographic digital asset and the respective physical asset with the first party; receiving an asset transfer request to transfer the cryptographic digital asset and respective physical asset to a second party; verifying a second unique user ID code which is associated with the second party; linking the cryptographic digital asset with the second unique user ID code; and creating a second transaction block including the unique digital asset ID code and the second unique user ID code in the distributed blockchain ledger for recordation of the transfer of possession of the cryptographic digital asset and the respective physical asset from the first party to the second party.
creating, via a first computing node within a distributed computing network, a digital asset file representative of a respective physical asset in possession of a first party;
initializing a digital asset generator to create a blockchain-enabled non-fungible token (NFT) of the digital asset file, wherein the NFT is assigned a unique digital asset identification (ID) code;
linking the unique digital asset ID code with a unique user ID code, wherein the unique user ID code is associated with the first party;
creating a first transaction block including the unique digital asset code and the unique user ID code, via the first computing node in a distributed blockchain ledger, to record possession of the cryptographic digital asset and the respective physical asset with the first party;
receiving an asset transfer request to transfer the cryptographic digital asset and respective physical asset to a second party;
verifying a second unique user ID code which is associated with the second party;
linking the cryptographic digital asset with the second unique user ID code; and
creating a second transaction block including the unique digital asset ID code and the second unique user ID code in the distributed blockchain ledger for recordation of the transfer of possession of the cryptographic digital asset and the respective physical asset from the first party to the second party.
The method of claim 1 , wherein the physical asset comprises lease records and wherein the digital asset file is stored within a digital vault accessible to only the first and second parties.
The method of claim 1 , wherein the physical asset comprises physical evidence and wherein the digital asset file is stored within a digital vault accessible to only the first and second parties.
The method of claim 1 , wherein the physical asset comprises feature film and documentary materials.
The method of claim 1 , wherein the physical asset comprises organs, body parts and pieces for transplant.
The method of claim 1 , wherein the physical asset comprises intellectual property and trade secret materials.
The method of claim 1 , wherein the physical asset comprises military contingency plans, operations plans or time phased force deployment data.
The method of claim 1 , wherein the physical asset comprises livestock and animal provenance and bloodline authenticity materials.
The method of claim 1 , wherein the physical asset comprises mineral and water rights materials.
The method of claim 1 , wherein the physical asset comprises data and materials for an electricity generating windmill.
The method of claim 10 , wherein electricity generated by the windmill is tokenized and sold on an associated tokenized commodities exchange.
The method of claim 1 , wherein the physical asset comprises data and materials associated with an oil, water or gas well.
The method of claim 12 , wherein output of the well is tokenized and sold on an associated tokenized commodities exchange
A decentralized computing system for creating, maintaining and tracking a cryptographic digital asset tied to physical asset, the decentralized computing system comprising: a cryptographic digital asset marketplace configured to store a plurality of digital assets and a plurality of unique digital asset identification (ID) codes; and a first computing node operatively connected to the cryptographic digital asset marketplace, the first computing node being programmed to: create a digital asset file representative of a respective physical asset in possession of a first party; initialize a digital asset generator to create a blockchain-enabled non fungible token (NFT) of the digital asset file, wherein the NFT is assigned a respective unique digital asset ID code; link the respective unique digital asset ID code with a unique user ID code, wherein the unique user ID code is associated with the first party; create a first transaction block including the respective unique digital asset ID code and the unique user ID code, via the first computing node in a distributed blockchain ledger, to record possession of the cryptographic digital asset and the respective physical asset with the first party; receive an asset transfer request to transfer the cryptographic digital asset and respective physical asset to a second party; verify a second unique user ID code which is associated with the second party; link the cryptographic digital asset with the second unique user ID code; create a second transaction block including the respective unique digital asset ID code and the second unique user ID code in the distributed blockchain ledger; and store the digital asset file within a digital vault wherein the digital asset fill is accessible only to a respective party identified within the first transaction block or second transaction block.
a cryptographic digital asset marketplace configured to store a plurality of digital assets and a plurality of unique digital asset identification (ID) codes; and
a first computing node operatively connected to the cryptographic digital asset marketplace, the first computing node being programmed to: create a digital asset file representative of a respective physical asset in possession of a first party; initialize a digital asset generator to create a blockchain-enabled non fungible token (NFT) of the digital asset file, wherein the NFT is assigned a respective unique digital asset ID code; link the respective unique digital asset ID code with a unique user ID code, wherein the unique user ID code is associated with the first party; create a first transaction block including the respective unique digital asset ID code and the unique user ID code, via the first computing node in a distributed blockchain ledger, to record possession of the cryptographic digital asset and the respective physical asset with the first party; receive an asset transfer request to transfer the cryptographic digital asset and respective physical asset to a second party; verify a second unique user ID code which is associated with the second party; link the cryptographic digital asset with the second unique user ID code; create a second transaction block including the respective unique digital asset ID code and the second unique user ID code in the distributed blockchain ledger; and store the digital asset file within a digital vault wherein the digital asset fill is accessible only to a respective party identified within the first transaction block or second transaction block.
create a digital asset file representative of a respective physical asset in possession of a first party;
initialize a digital asset generator to create a blockchain-enabled non fungible token (NFT) of the digital asset file, wherein the NFT is assigned a respective unique digital asset ID code;
link the respective unique digital asset ID code with a unique user ID code, wherein the unique user ID code is associated with the first party;
create a first transaction block including the respective unique digital asset ID code and the unique user ID code, via the first computing node in a distributed blockchain ledger, to record possession of the cryptographic digital asset and the respective physical asset with the first party;
receive an asset transfer request to transfer the cryptographic digital asset and respective physical asset to a second party;
verify a second unique user ID code which is associated with the second party;
link the cryptographic digital asset with the second unique user ID code;
create a second transaction block including the respective unique digital asset ID code and the second unique user ID code in the distributed blockchain ledger; and
store the digital asset file within a digital vault wherein the digital asset fill is accessible only to a respective party identified within the first transaction block or second transaction block.
Ref US20190340554A1: [content unavailable]
Ref US11109214B1: [content unavailable]
Ref US20190340554: Claims:
1. A computer-implemented system, comprising:
one or more processors; and one or more computer-readable storage media containing instructions which when executed on the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform a method comprising: determining, from user activity data from sensor data from at least one user device, entity features of project entities; grouping the project entities into projects based at least in part on patterns formed by the entity features between the project entities; determining, from content of the project entities of a project of the projects, occurrences of events with respect to users, each event corresponding to one or more predefined user activities; analyzing the occurrences of the events to determine, for each user of a plurality of the users, an engagement level of the user with the project; assigning a user a role for the project from predefined roles based on applying a role feature corresponding to the engagement level of the user to a machine learning model that represents the role, each of the predefined roles represented by a corresponding machine learning model that uses a different set of role features; based on the assigning of the user to the role, incorporating an assignment of the user to the role into a project repository of the project, the project repository comprising assignments between users and the predefined roles for the project; and determining, based on one or more of the assignments in the project repository, a notification in association with the project.
2. The computer-implemented system of claim 1, wherein the project entities comprise emails, meetings, and files.
3. The computer-implemented system of claim 1, wherein the engagement level is based on a frequency of the occurrences of the events for the user.
4. The computer-implemented system of claim 1, wherein a plurality of the predefined roles correspond to different magnitudes of engagement levels with the project.
5. The computer-implemented system of claim 1, wherein the project repository includes engagement levels of users for the project, and the determining the notification is further based on one or more of the engagement levels in the project repository.
6. The computer-implemented system of claim 1, wherein the machine learning model for the role uses an additional role feature corresponding to the occurrences of an event of the events for the user, the event comprising the user setting one or more priorities for the project.
7. The computer-implemented system of claim 1, wherein the machine learning model for the role uses an additional role feature corresponding to the occurrences of an event of the events for the user, the event comprising the user producing content of an output of the project.
8. The computer-implemented system of claim 1, wherein the machine learning model for the role uses an additional role feature corresponding to the occurrences of an event of the events for the user, the event comprising the user assigning a task of the project to one or more other users.
9. The computer-implemented system of claim 1, wherein the machine learning model for the role uses an additional role feature corresponding to the occurrences of an event of the events for the user, the event comprising the user providing feedback on one or more aspects of the project.
10. The computer-implemented system of claim 1, determining importance levels for the occurrences of the events based on project state categories assigned to the occurrences of the events, wherein the machine learning model for the role uses an additional role feature that is based on the importance levels for the occurrences of the events that are associated with the user.
11. The computer-implemented system of claim 1, determining importance levels for the occurrences of the events based on content subject matter categories assigned to the occurrences of the events, wherein the machine learning model for the role uses an additional role feature that is based on a variance in the content subject matter categories for the occurrences of the events that are associated with the user.
12. The computer-implemented system of claim 1, wherein the machine learning model for the role uses an additional role feature corresponding to an event of the user receiving an output of the project.
13. The computer-implemented system of claim 1, wherein the determining the notification in association with the project comprises:
associating a meeting with the project based on comparing project characteristics of the project to meeting context of the meeting; and based on the meeting context of the meeting and the role of the user, selecting the user as an attendee for the meeting, wherein the notification is based on the selecting of the user as the attendee.
14. One or more computer storage media storing computer-usable instructions that, when executed by one or more computing devices, cause the one or more computing devices to perform a method comprising:
determining, from user activity data from sensor data from at least one user device, entity features of project entities, the entity features including for each project entity of a plurality of the project entities, a set of users associated with the project entity; grouping the project entities into projects based at least in part on patterns formed by the set of users between the project entities; determining, from content of the project entities of a project of the projects, occurrences of events with respect to users, each event corresponding to one or more predefined user activities; assigning a user a role for the project from predefined roles based on applying a role feature corresponding to the occurrences for at least one event of the events that are associated with the user to a machine learning model that represents the role, each of the predefined roles represented by a corresponding machine learning model that uses a different set of role features that corresponds to a different set of the events than others of the predefined roles; and determining content related to the project based on the assigning of the user to the role.
15. The one or more computer storage media of claim 14, wherein the determining the content related to the project comprises:
identifying an absence of the user in a confirmed attendee list of a meeting associated with the project; and based on the identifying of the absence of the user in the confirmed attendee list, and based on the meeting context of the meeting and the role of the user, automatically determining an alternate meeting time for the meeting using a calendar associated with the user.
16. The one or more computer storage media of claim 14, wherein the determining the content related to the project comprises ranking a plurality of emails by similarity to content subject matter categories based on the role of the user and by project characteristics of the project, wherein the method further causes displaying one or more of the plurality of the emails to the user in an inbox based on the ranking of the plurality of the emails.
17. A computer-implemented method, comprising:
grouping project entities into projects based at least in part on similarities between entity features between the project entities; determining, from content of the project entities of a project of the projects, occurrences of events with respect to users, each event corresponding to one or more predefined user activities; analyzing the occurrences of the events to determine, for each user of a plurality of the users, an engagement level of the user with the project; assigning a user a role for the project from predefined roles based on applying a role feature corresponding to the engagement level of the user to a machine learning model that represents the role; and determining content related to the project based on the assigning of the user to the role.
18. The method of claim 17, further comprising analyzing the occurrences of the events to determine, for each user of a plurality of the users, an engagement level of the user with the project, wherein the machine learning model for the role uses an additional role feature corresponding to the engagement level of the user.
19. The method of claim 17, wherein the machine learning model for the role uses an additional role feature corresponding to the occurrences of an event of the events for the user, the event comprising the user setting one or more priorities for the project.
20. The method of claim 17, wherein the machine learning model for the role uses an additional role feature corresponding to the occurrences of an event of the events for the user, the event comprising the user producing content of an output of the project.
Ref US11109214: Claims:
1. A method comprising:
detecting, at a public safety answering point (PSAP) server, an authentication of a PSAP user via a client access device;
retrieving, by the PSAP server, a PSAP load comprising one or more of:
a current PSAP call-taking load and a current PSAP first-responder-dispatching load; and
an historical PSAP call-taking load and an historical PSAP first-responder-dispatching load;

assigning, by the PSAP server, based on the PSAP load, a role to the PSAP user, the role comprising one of: a call-taking role; a first-responder-dispatching role; and a combined call-taking and first-responder-dispatching role; and
serving, by the PSAP server, to the client access device, based on the role assigned to the PSAP user, a corresponding interface to one of: a call-taking application; a first-responder-dispatching application; and a combined call-taking and first-responder-dispatching application.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein:
the client access device is located at an on-premises PSAP location; and
the retrieving the PSAP load comprises retrieving the current PSAP call-taking load and the current PSAP first-responder-dispatching load.
3. The method of claim 1, further comprising:
determining that a PSAP system has one or more of: gone off-line, and entered a disaster recovery mode, and
wherein the retrieving the PSAP load comprises retrieving the historical PSAP call-taking load and the historical PSAP first-responder-dispatching load for a given time period prior to the PSAP system one or more of: going off-line; and entering the disaster recovery mode.
4. The method of claim 3, wherei
[Truncated to input limit]