IP Library › Granted Patent US 12,711,562
Granted Patent B1
US 12,711,562 · App. 19/094,211 · Granted Aug 18, 2026

Computer-implemented systems and methods for real estate metadata acquisition, cryptographic verification, and smart-contract reconciliation using blockchain and machine learning

Inventor: Tyrone Burnett (Indianapolis, IN)
G06Q50/16G06Q30/0185G06Q2220/00
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 12,711,562
App. No.
19/094,211
Filed
Mar 28, 2025
Granted
Aug 18, 2026
Kind
B1
Art Unit
3629
USPC
705/313
Abstract

In some approaches, a computer-implemented system acquires and reconciles real estate metadata from diverse sources to detect potential ownership or record discrepancies. The system may submit automated public record requests for government-issued documents (e.g., land development building or zoning permit applications, subsequent permits or logs, or property ownership histories referencing a first owner of record) and extract structured metadata fields—including Tax Map Reference (TMR) values, Parcel Identification (PI) values, or Assessor Parcel (AP) identifier values. By cross-referencing these data with last-owner-of-record information from deeds, liens, or other instruments in public registries, the system verifies authenticity via a cryptographic infrastructure. A blockchain-based audit trail logs transactions for enhanced transparency. Integrating AI and distributed ledger technologies, these implementations streamline real estate transactions, improve data reliability, and facilitate cross-jurisdictional metadata validation.

Claims (12)

1 . A blockchain-based metadata-reconciliation system for real-estate records, the system comprising:

(a) a Blockchain Audit Trail Module, including a distributed-ledger processing unit and a cryptographic engine, operable to perform operations comprising:

(i) generating and storing canonicalized cryptographic digests of jurisdiction-specific metadata fields, including Tax Map Reference (TMR) values, Parcel Identification (PI) values, and Assessor Parcel (AP) identifier values, by executing a deterministic parallel hashing routine and recording comparisons between data associated with a first owner of record and a last owner of record in a blockchain ledger;

(ii) storing the canonicalized cryptographic digests as linked Merkle-tree structures recorded across multiple ledger nodes;

(iii) verifying data integrity using a zero-knowledge-proof (ZKP) verifier that detects unauthorized ledger modification while preserving confidentiality of record content; and

(iv) appending authenticated annotations, including supplemental evidence, to the blockchain ledger through Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA)-secured commit operations executed in a hardware-anchored enclave to prevent exfiltration of cryptographic keys.

2 . The system of claim 1 , further comprising an Intelligent Public-Record Request Generator operable to implement a public-record acquisition subsystem comprising:

(i) a rules parser coupled to an AI-powered compliance engine trained on relevant jurisdiction-specific protocols and operable to parse local regulatory frameworks;

(ii) a request queue operable to generate and submit public-record requests that align with applicable real-estate document guidelines; and

(iii) a tracking datastore operable to track request statuses by logging queries and responses into a blockchain ledger as cryptographically hashed entries that are auditably tamper-evident.

3 . The system of claim 1 , wherein a distributed-ledger processing unit executes Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA)-secured commit operations that cryptographically sign ledger updates and cryptographically link the updates to historical records to maintain a tamper-evident audit trail.

4 . The system of claim 1 , wherein integration of the zero-knowledge-proof verifier, the Merkle-tree structures, and the Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA)-secured commit operations provides reduced verification latency, reduced hash-collision propagation, and tamper-evident, privacy-preserving validation of jurisdiction-specific metadata prior to recordation in the blockchain ledger and associated disbursement of real-property transaction funds.

References Cited (64)
US 7340608B2 · Laurie et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 8271431B1 · Carrington · 2012 [cited by examiner]
US 8571973B1 · Haberaecker et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 8688461B1 · Richards et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 8689094B1 · Trimble et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 9679276B1 · Cuende · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 10074145B2 · Budlong · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 10121215B2 · Branscomb et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 10248731B1 · Brouwer, II et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 11055436B2 · Saket et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 11145017B1 · Wu et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 11277260B2 · Sen et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 11373257B1 · Guo et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 11567904B2 · Earley et al. · 2023 [cited by applicant]
US 11593901B2 · Blackman et al. · 2023 [cited by applicant]
US 11748371B2 · Thomas et al. · 2023 [cited by applicant]
US 20030140064A1 · Klein · 2003 [cited by examiner]
US 20150074018A1 · Gill · 2015 [cited by examiner]
US 20160300234A1 · Moss-Pultz et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20170132621A1 · Miller et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20180189528A1 · Hanis et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180268504A1 · Paolini-Subramanya et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20190033090A1 · Tzirkel-Hancock et al. · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 20190294647A1 · Brouwer · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 20200044827A1 · Snow · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200111068A1 · Scarselli et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200410491A1 · Ronnow · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 20210319059A1 · Vianello et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20220067117A1 · Brouwer, II et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20220284432A1 · Papantoniou et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20220358607A1 · Guo · 2022 [cited by examiner]
US 20230192304A1 · Mattikalli et al. · 2023 [cited by examiner]
US 20240054586A1 · Singh · 2024 [cited by examiner]
US 20240220969A1 · Marusyk · 2024 [cited by examiner]
US 20240388457A1 · Gordon · 2024 [cited by applicant]
Stewart Title | VA Bulletins MU2009004 / SA2013013 (2013) → ¶[0303]-[0309] | Context Note: Post-transaction workflows without real-time metadata validation. [cited by applicant]
Alta | VA Homebuyer Predatory Contract Protection (2024) → ¶[0310]-[0316] | Note: Industry guidance not incorporating modern metadata-integrity technologies. [cited by applicant]
First Excel Title | Promotion Notice (2016) → ¶[0317]-[0323] | Context Note: Represents conventional property-record processing workflows. [cited by applicant]
First American Title | AgentNet Order Insights (2024) → ¶[0324]-[0327] | Context Note: Describes order-management tools without blockchain-based validation. [cited by applicant]
Ginnie Mae | MBS Portfolio PR ($2.71T) (2025) → ¶[0023]-[0030] | Ilustrates large-scale mortgage processing without metadata reconciliation across decentralized local systems. [cited by applicant]
Freddie Mac | Execution of Legal Documents Guidance (2025) → ¶[0031]-[0037] | Note: Discusses high-volume document execution absent blockchain or tamper-evident validation. [cited by applicant]
Fannie Mae | Legal Documents Resource Page (2025) → ¶[0038]-[0047] | Note: Highlights fragmented property-recording processes and metadata vulnerabilities. [cited by applicant]
HUD | Handbook 4310.5 Single Family Servicing (1994) → ¶[0048]-[0057] | Note: Legacy servicing guidance lacking modern data-integrity or reconciliation controls. [cited by applicant]
FHA | Direct Endorsement Program Guidance (2024) → ¶[0058]-[0066] | Context Note: Efficiency-driven endorsement framework without anomaly-detection mechanisms. [cited by applicant]
VA | Lenders Handbook M26-7 Ch. 4 (2019) → ¶[0067]-[0074] | Context Note: Underwriting processes dependent on decentralized property-record systems lacking cross-validation. [cited by applicant]
Ginnie Mae | Second Amendment to Contract w/ BNY Mellon (2015) → ¶ [0023]-[0030] | Context Note: SEC filing on Ginnie Mae operational processes. [cited by applicant]
Loudoun County | Commissioners of Accounts Manual Ch. 16 (2019) → ¶[0084]-[0093] | Context Note: Highlights systemic gaps in trustee-filing and property-recording workflows. [cited by applicant]
Loudoun County| AlertMe Notification System (2023) → ¶ [0094]-[0102] | Context Note: Property-notification service without proactive validation or tamper-evident controls. [cited by applicant]
Loudoun County | LandMARC System Overview (2023) → ¶[0103]-[0111] | Context Note: Centralized permitting system lacking blockchain-backed data-integrity measures. [cited by applicant]
Ampaloni / A&M | Land Use Audit Article (2024) → ¶[0084]-[0093] | Context Note: Independent audit confirming vulnerabilities in land-use and metadata workflows. [cited by applicant]
Plotkin / Covington | MERS eRegistry Validity Memo (2004) → ¶[0112]-[0124] | Context Note: Legal analysis identifying pre- and post-origination metadata vulnerabilities. [cited by applicant]
Loudoun County | FOIA Permit Records (19253 Harlow Sq) (2012) → ¶[0103]-[0111] | Note: Example of jurisdiction-level record inconsistencies relevant to metadata integrity. [cited by applicant]
Woolley & Herzog | Lost Chain of Title Study (2011) → ¶[0075]-[0083] | Context Note: Foundational study on title-chain disruption and property-recording risks. [cited by applicant]
Lyman | Corruption in Land Use & Building Regulation vol. I (1979) → ¶[0048]-[0057] | Context Note: Federal study on land-use regulatory weaknesses. [cited by applicant]
Merscorp Holdings | MERS System Integration Handbook vol. I (2015) → ¶[0112]-[0124] | Note: References chain-of-title vulnerabilities and relevant metadata-integrity gaps. [cited by applicant]
Merscorp Holdings | MERS Service Mark Reg. 2084831 (1997) → ¶[0112]-[0124] | Note: Foundational MERS reference cited in connection with specification. [cited by applicant]
Ice / Simplifile | eRecording System Acquisition Release (2019) → ¶[0233]-[0241] Describes eRecording workflows lacking robust metadata validation or reconciliation. [cited by applicant]
Fidlar Tech | Property Fraud Alert Notice (2024) → ¶[0242]-[0250] | Note: Illustrates reactive property-fraud notifications without intake-side integrity checks. [cited by applicant]
DTS | ALERTME Notification Program Release (2023) → ¶[0251]-[0261] | Note: Notification model that does not include proactive metadata verification. [cited by applicant]
Home Title Lock | FBI Advisory Release (2022) → ¶[0262]-[0272] | Note: Post-recordation monitoring approach without pre-recordation validation. [cited by applicant]
Tyler Tech | iasWorld Adoption Notice (2022) → ¶[0273]-[0283] | Note: Centralized land-management workflow lacking blockchain-based integrity control. [cited by applicant]
Old Republic Title | Transaction Services Overview (2025) → ¶[0284]-[0290] | Note: Post-transaction risk management framework without metadata reconciliation. [cited by applicant]
Title One Settlement | Services Summary (2025) → ¶[0291]-[0296] | Note: Conventional transactional processes without anomaly detection or validation. [cited by applicant]
Landamerica | Bankruptcy / Legacy Services (2008) → ¶[0297]-[0302] | Context Note: Illustrates legacy systems lacking modern data-integrity measures. [cited by applicant]