DETAILED 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 . This office action is in response to applicant's communication of October 15, 2025. The rejections are stated below. Claims 1, 3-5, 7-8, 10-12, 14-15, 17-18, and 20 are pending and have been examined.
Response to Amendment/Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/23/2026 concerning 35 U.S.C. 101 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The claims are directed to a method for processing a real-time electronic transaction that involves (a) matching customer PII data between a payment vehicle and a stored ACH account, (b) offering an incentive to use the ACH account, (c) obtaining customer consent, and (d) routing payment via an ACH network instead of a credit/debit network. These steps recite a fundamental economic practice: encouraging a customer to switch from one payment method to another by offering a discount or reward. The concept of providing an incentive to influence payment method selection at the point of sale is a longstanding commercial practice predating computer networks. The claims therefore recite an abstract idea. The additional claim limitations do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they merely invoke computer components a PIN pad terminal, a POS system, a database, and a display to perform conventional data processing steps. Capturing financial account data from a payment vehicle using a PIN pad terminal is standard in retail environments. Extracting PII from captured financial account data is using technology as a tool. Matching PII data against a database is a use of technology as a tool to implement the exception. Displaying prompts and capturing user interactions on a PIN pad terminal display are is a use of technology as a tool to implement the exception. Applying an incentive to transaction data and transmitting data to an ACH network are customary payment processing steps. The recited “overlaid display area” is a design choice that does not transform the abstract idea into a patent-eligible concept. The use of a “personal identification number (PIN) pad terminal” and a “point-of-sale (POS) system” does not impose a meaningful technological limitation. These are conventional hardware components in the retail payment environment. The applicant’s emphasis on “real-time” transmission does not render the claim patent eligible because real-time processing is a standard requirement for POS transactions and is not a technological improvement. The claim as a whole does not include an inventive concept that transforms the abstract idea into a patent-eligible application. The recited steps, considered both individually and as an ordered combination, are routine, conventional, and well-understood in the field of electronic payment processing. The applicant has not identified any technological improvement to the POS system beyond the use of generic computer components to perform ordinary data collection, comparison, and transmission functions.
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, 3-5, 7-8, 10-12, 14-15, 17-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea of linking alternative payment information with personally identifying information without significantly more.
Claim 1 is directed to a method which is one of the four statutory categories of invention (Step 1: YES).
Claim 1 recites “a … method for processing a … transaction using alternative payment information linked with online personally identifying information (PII) data, the method comprising:
capturing, by a personal identification number … in … communication with a …, first financial account data transmitted by a payment vehicle in … contact with the … during a … transaction, wherein the first financial account data identifies at least one … associated with the payment vehicle and to process the … transaction;
extracting, by one or more … of the …, first PII data from the captured first financial account data, wherein the first PII is associated with a primary account number (PAN);;
determining, by the one or more … of the …, that the first Pll data from the captured first financial account data matches second PII data of second financial account data, stored in a … associated with the …, wherein the second PII data is associate with automated clearing house (ACH) data;
associating, by the one or more … of the …, the first PII data with the second PII in the …;
determining, by the … of the …, that payment using the second financial data is not enabled based on the second PII data in the …;
displaying, by the … of the …, a first customer prompt for user interaction on a … , the first customer prompt including an incentive and a first …;
capturing, by the …, a first user interaction with the first …, wherein the first user interaction comprises a selection to enable payment for the … transaction using the second financial account data;
in response to capturing the selection, displaying by the one or more … of the …, a second customer prompt including a second … for user interaction on a… including the …;
capturing, by the …, a second user interaction with the second interactive element, wherein the second user interaction comprises authorization information for the … transaction;
in response to capturing the authorization information, applying, by the one or more … of the …, the incentive to transaction data of the … transaction, and
transmitting, by the one or more … of the … and in …, the transaction data of the … transaction to an … instead of the … associated with the … for processing using the ACH data based on the authorization information”. These limitations describe an abstract idea of linking alternative payment information with personally identifying information and corresponds to Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity (commercial or legal interactions. Accordingly, the claim 1 recites an abstract idea (Step 2A: Prong 1: YES).
Claim 1 also recites as additional elements such as “”computer-implemented”, “real-time”, “pad terminal”, “electronic”, “at least one payment network”, “first and second overlaid display area of a display of the PIN pad terminal”, “ACH network”, “point-of-sale (POS) system”, “real-time electronic”, “one or more processors of the POS system”, “interactive element”, and “database” which do no more than implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment Therefore, claim 1 is directed to an abstract idea without a practical application (Step 2A - Prong 2: NO).
Further, as the additional elements of claim 1 do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, they do not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field. Thus, claim 1 is not patent eligible (Step 2B: NO).
Claims 8 and 15 also recite the abstract idea of idea of linking alternative payment information with personally identifying information and corresponds to Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity (commercial or legal interactions) step one of step 2A (MPEP 2106.04). Claim 8 includes the additional elements of “a computer system comprising: comprising a processor; and a memory having processor-readable instructions”, “real-time”, “pad terminal”, “electronic”, “at least one payment network”, “first and second overlaid display area of a display of the PIN pad terminal”, “ACH network”, “point-of-sale (POS) system”, “real-time electronic”, “one or more processors of the POS system”, “interactive element”, and “database”. Claim 15 includes the additional elements of “a non-transitory computer readable medium storing instructions”, “computer”, “real-time”, “pad terminal”, “electronic”, “at least one payment network”, “first and second overlaid display area of a display of the PIN pad terminal”, “ACH network”, “point-of-sale (POS) system”, “real-time electronic”, “one or more processors of the POS system”, “interactive element”, and “database”. The additional elements do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment. Therefore, as the additional elements do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment they do not improve the functioning of a computer or improve another technology or technical field.
Claim 3 recites “wherein the … is maintained by a merchant” which further describe the abstract idea. The claim includes “PIN pad terminal”, as an additional element. However, the additional element does no more than link the judicial exception to a particular technological environment. Therefore, as the additional element does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment it does not improve the functioning of a computer or improve another technology or technical field.
Claim 4 recites “wherein the incentive is one or more of a discount for the … transaction, coupons to be applied to future purchases, a monetary gift, or a non-monetary gift” which further describe the abstract idea. The claim includes “real-time electronic”, as an additional element. However, the additional element does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment. Therefore, as the additional element does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment it does not improve the functioning of a computer or improve another technology or technical field.
Claim 5 recites “wherein the authorization information comprises one or more of a numeric or alphanumeric authorization code or … information associated with a customer” which further describe the abstract idea. The claim includes “biometric”, as an additional element. However, the additional element does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment. Therefore, as the additional element does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment it does not improve the functioning of a computer or improve another technology or technical field.
Claim 7 recites “wherein the second financial account data includes … [clearing house] data” which further describe the abstract idea. The claim includes “automated”, as an additional element. However, the additional element does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment. Therefore, as the additional element does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment it does not improve the functioning of a computer or improve another technology or technical field.
Claim 10 recites “wherein the … is maintained by a merchant” which further describe the abstract idea. The claim includes “PIN pad terminal”, as an additional element. However, the additional element does no more than link the judicial exception to a particular technological environment. Therefore, as the additional element does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment it does not improve the functioning of a computer or improve another technology or technical field.
Claim 11 recites “wherein the incentive is one or more of a discount for the … transaction, coupons to be applied to future purchases, a monetary gift, or a non-monetary gift” which further describe the abstract idea. The claim includes “real-time electronic”, as an additional element. However, the additional element does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment. Therefore, as the additional element does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment it does not improve the functioning of a computer or improve another technology or technical field.
Claim 12 recites “wherein the authorization information comprises one or more of a numeric or alphanumeric authorization code or … information associated with a customer” which further describe the abstract idea. The claim includes “biometric”, as an additional element. However, the additional element does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment. Therefore, as the additional element does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment it does not improve the functioning of a computer or improve another technology or technical field.
Claim 14 recites “wherein the second financial account data includes … [clearing house] data” which further describe the abstract idea. The claim includes “automated”, as an additional element. However, the additional element does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment. Therefore, as the additional element does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment it does not improve the functioning of a computer or improve another technology or technical field.
Claim 17 recites “wherein the … is maintained by a merchant” which further describe the abstract idea. The claim includes “PIN pad terminal”, as an additional element. However, the additional element does no more than link the judicial exception to a particular technological environment. Therefore, as the additional element does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment it does not improve the functioning of a computer or improve another technology or technical field.
Claim 18 recites “wherein the incentive is one or more of a discount for the … transaction, coupons to be applied to future purchases, a monetary gift, or a non-monetary gift” which further describe the abstract idea. The claim includes “real-time electronic”, as an additional element. However, the additional element does no mare thar link the judicial exception to a particular technological environment. Therefore, as the additional element does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment it does not improve the functioning of a computer or improve another technology or technical field.
Claim 20 recites “wherein the second financial account data includes … [clearing house] data” which further describe the abstract idea. The claim includes “automated”, as an additional element. However, the additional element does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment. Therefore, as the additional element does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment it does not improve the functioning of a computer or improve another technology or technical field.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN T POE whose telephone number is (571)272-9789. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9:30am through 6pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ryan Donlon can be reached on 571-270-3602. 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 the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/K.T.P/Examiner, Art Unit 3692 /KEVIN T POE/
/RYAN D DONLON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3692 July 16, 2026
Prosecution Insights