CONFIDENTIAL PATENT POSITION REVIEW
PATENT POSITION18/856,095
LEVEL 2 — CONFIDENTIAL EVALUATION
Evidence Chronology

ILLUST PUBLIC EVIDENCE TIMELINE

Each significant public source is plotted against the patent priority date of 14 APRIL 2022. Material dated before that date is not hidden — it is separated, because it may be relevant to a different question.

Two different questions

Evidence used to demonstrate current technical correspondence is a separate matter from evidence that may bear on patentability or validity. This page keeps the two apart.

Public evidence plotted against the patent priority date
PRE-PRIORITY

Material dated before 14 April 2022.

IL-001

2021

Illust — What is Illust Space?

Illust Space (company-published)

PRE-PRIORITY EVIDENCE — REQUIRES PRIOR-ART REVIEW

PATENT PRIORITY DATE — 14 APRIL 2022

Material below is first documented after the priority date. Material above requires separate patent-attorney assessment.

POST-PRIORITY

Material first documented after 14 April 2022.

No records in this classification.

CURRENT

Material showing current or recent platform capability.

No records in this classification.

DATE UNCERTAIN

Original publication date cannot presently be established reliably.

IL-002

DATE NOT ESTABLISHED

Illust — Publishing in The Space

Illust Space (company-published)

IL-003

DATE NOT ESTABLISHED

Illust — GeoSpatial Registry

Illust Space (company-published)

IL-004

DATE NOT ESTABLISHED

Illust — Terms of Service

Illust Space (company-published)

IL-005

DATE NOT ESTABLISHED

Illust — Current Home Page

Illust Space (company-published)

Potential relevance to patentability/validity requires separate patent-attorney assessment.

Supporting and third-party records

Patent-family records and third-party material reviewed alongside the ILLUST sources.

Public evidence plotted against the patent priority date
PRE-PRIORITY

Material dated before 14 April 2022.

DR-001

February 2022

Dropp GG — $8M Raise and Physical-World Metaverse Architecture

Company and third-party technology press

PRE-PRIORITY EVIDENCE — REQUIRES PRIOR-ART REVIEW

DR-002

February 2022

Dropp Land — Geo-location Enabled NFT Platform and Metaverse

Company and third-party technology press

PRE-PRIORITY EVIDENCE — REQUIRES PRIOR-ART REVIEW

PATENT PRIORITY DATE — 14 APRIL 2022

Material below is first documented after the priority date. Material above requires separate patent-attorney assessment.

POST-PRIORITY

Material first documented after 14 April 2022.

DR-003

2022

Dropp / Animoca announcement

Animoca Brands (third-party public material)

PT-001

2023

Public Patent Family — WO 2023/197041 A1

WIPO / public patent record

PT-002

2025

U.S. Publication — US 2025/0245933 A1

USPTO / public patent record

CURRENT

Material showing current or recent platform capability.

No records in this classification.

DATE UNCERTAIN

Original publication date cannot presently be established reliably.

No records in this classification.

Potential relevance to patentability/validity requires separate patent-attorney assessment.

PRE-PRIORITY EVIDENCE — REQUIRES PRIOR-ART REVIEW

Potential relevance to patentability/validity requires separate patent-attorney assessment.

3 records in this review predate the patent priority date. Such material is not described as prior art in this review and no conclusion is drawn as to the validity of any claim. Potential relevance to patentability/validity requires separate patent-attorney assessment.

Patent Mapping Disclaimer

This presentation has been prepared for preliminary commercial and technical evaluation purposes. The analysis is based primarily on publicly available information and does not constitute a complete claim analysis, allegation of infringement, legal opinion or legal advice. References to technical correspondence indicate areas identified for further evaluation and should not be interpreted as a determination of infringement or legal liability. Certain technical operations cannot be established from public information and may require further confidential technical review. Patent prosecution status and claim scope should be independently confirmed with qualified patent counsel before reliance is placed upon this analysis.