Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 16/639,206

DATA STRUCTURE, TRANSMISSION DEVICE, RECEPTION DEVICE, SETTLEMENT DEVICE, METHOD, AND COMPUTER PROGRAM

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jun 19, 2020
Examiner
RAK, TAYLOR SIMON DUANE
Art Unit
3697
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Nti Inc.
OA Round
6 (Non-Final)
46%
Grant Probability
Moderate
6-7
OA Rounds
3y 8m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 46% of resolved cases
46%
Career Allow Rate
59 granted / 128 resolved
-5.9% vs TC avg
Strong +54% interview lift
Without
With
+54.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 8m
Avg Prosecution
16 currently pending
Career history
144
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
25.6%
-14.4% vs TC avg
§103
31.2%
-8.8% vs TC avg
§102
9.5%
-30.5% vs TC avg
§112
27.7%
-12.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 128 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Response to Arguments/Amendments Regarding rejection of the claims under 35 USC 101, Applicant’s arguments (see pgs. 7-9 of the Remarks filed 10/30/2025) are found persuasive and the rejection is hereby withdrawn. Applicant’s arguments with respect to rejection of the claims under 35 USC 103 over Voldman have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claims 7-8, 11, and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Voldman (US 2018/0268411 "Voldman") in view of Mills (US 2015/0242825 “Mills”). Regarding claims 7 and 11, Voldman discloses: A settlement device and settlement method executed by the settlement device, comprising: a network interface; a memory; and one or more processors coupled to the interface and the memory and configured to: receive...the virtual currency data from the predetermined device for requesting settlement, via the electronic network, the virtual currency data...including virtual currency encryption data ("one-time password (OTP)") which is a character string extracted, in conformity with a predetermined rule, from a character string obtained by encrypting, according to respective different methods (“cryptographic keys”), a plaintext version of the original data which is data including at least amount information specifying a monetary value of the virtual currency data, the virtual currency data further including serial number information ("seed data"), in plain text, unique to each virtual currency data for distinguishing the virtual currency data from other virtual currency data, wherein the serial number information serves as encryption condition data which is information for specifying a condition when the original data is encrypted (Fig. 3, Fig. 7a-7b, 0020, 0052, 0072-0073, 0077-0079); generate encryption data for confirmation which is a character string extracted, in conformity with a rule identical to the predetermined rule used when the virtual currency encryption data is generated, from a character string obtained by encrypting, according to a method identical to a method used when the original data is encrypted, original data for confirmation which is data identical to the original data serving as an origin of the virtual currency encryption data included in the received virtual currency data and which was previously stored by the settlement device (Fig. 7b, 0055, 0077-0078)...; determine a method of encrypting (“cryptographic key”) the original data for confirmation, based on the encryption condition data included together with the virtual currency encryption data in the virtual currency data (Fig. 7b, 0055, 0077-0078); compare the virtual currency encryption data included in the virtual currency data received by the settlement device receiving means with the encryption data for confirmation, and determine that the virtual currency data including the virtual currency encryption data is authentic, when both the data coincide with each other (Fig. 7b, 0077-0078); and accept settlement of an amount of money specified by the amount information included in the original data, when the virtual currency data is determined to be authentic (0064, 0069). The Examiner notes that Voldman does not specifically disclose “serial number information, in plaintext.” However, the difference between seed data and “serial number information, in plaintext” is only found in the non-functional descriptive material and is not functionally involved in the steps recited. The steps of receiving virtual currency data including serial number information in plaintext and determining a method of encryption based on encryption condition data (i.e. serial number information) would be performed the same regardless of the descriptive material since none of the steps explicitly interact therewith. Limitations that are not functionally interrelated with the useful acts, structure, or properties of the claimed invention carry little or no patentable weight. Thus, this descriptive material will not distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art in terms of patentability, see In re Ngai, 70 USPQ2d 1862 (CAFC 2004); In re Gulack, 703 F.2d 1381, 1385, 217 USPQ 401, 404 (Fed. Cir. 1983); In re Lowry, 32 F.3d 1579, 32 USPQ2d 1031 (Fed. Cir. 1994). Therefore, it would also have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s invention to receive any type of data and use such data to determine a method of encryption because such data does not functionally relate to the steps in the method claimed and because the subjective interpretation of the data does not patentably distinguish the claimed invention. Furthermore, Voldman does not disclose: receive from a user terminal, via an electronic network, original data; receive, in response to the user terminal delivering virtual currency data to a predetermined device for requesting settlement, the virtual currency data from the predetermined device for requesting settlement, via the electronic network, the virtual currency data having been generated by the settlement device...; ...original data identical to the original data serving as an origin of virtual currency encryption data included in the received virtual currency data and which was previously stored by the settlement device after receipt from the user terminal. However, in the same field of endeavor, Mills discloses: receive from a user terminal, via an electronic network, original data (Fig. 6-7, 0035, 0103, 0112); receive, in response to the user terminal delivering virtual currency data to a predetermined device for requesting settlement, the virtual currency data from the predetermined device for requesting settlement, via the electronic network (Fig. 7-8, 0124, 0137), the virtual currency data having been generated by the settlement device and including virtual currency encryption data which is a character string extracted, in conformity with a predetermined rule, from a character string obtained by encrypting, according to respective different methods, a plaintext version of the original data which is data including at least amount information specifying a monetary value of the virtual currency data, the virtual currency data further including serial number information, in plain text, unique to each virtual currency data for distinguishing the virtual currency data from other virtual currency data (Fig. 5b, Fig. 7, 0057, 0094-0095, 0118-0119)...; generate encryption data for confirmation which is a character string extracted, in conformity with a rule identical to the predetermined rule used when the virtual currency encryption data is generated, from a character string obtained by [decrypting], according to a method identical to a method used when the original data is encrypted, original data for confirmation which is data identical to the original data serving as an origin of virtual currency encryption data included in the received virtual currency data and which was previously stored by the settlement device after receipt from the user terminal (Fig. 5a, Fig. 8, 0039, 0094-0095, 0126, 0137-0139). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify claims 7 and 11 disclosed by Voldman by including receiving original data and generating virtual currency data using said original data for later receipt and validation as disclosed by Mills. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to anonymize and improve security of transactions (Mills 0040, 0193). Regarding claim 8, Voldman in view of Mills discloses all limitations of claim 7. Voldman further discloses: wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: record the original data for confirmation in a first recording means (“account record”), and when the settlement device receives the virtual currency data, read, from the first recording means, original data for confirmation identical to the original data serving as an origin of the virtual currency encryption data included in the virtual currency data, and generate the encryption data for confirmation, based on the read original data for confirmation (Fig. 7a, 0070, 0073, 0077-0078). Regarding claims 13 and 15, Voldman discloses: A virtual currency data generating device and method executed by the virtual currency generating device, comprising: a network interface; a memory; and one or more processors coupled to the interface and the memory and configured to: generate virtual currency data including virtual currency encryption data which is a character string extracted, in conformity with a predetermined rule, from a character string obtained by encrypting, according to respective different methods, plaintext version of the original data which is data including at least amount information specifying a monetary value of the virtual currency data, the virtual currency data further including serial number information, in plain text, unique to each virtual currency data for distinguishing the virtual currency data from other virtual currency data, wherein the serial number information serves as encryption condition data which is information for specifying a condition when the original data is encrypted, wherein the virtual currency data has a monetary value (Fig. 3, Fig. 7a-7b, 0052, 0072-0073); and receive the virtual currency data from a predetermined device via the electronic network (Fig. 7b, 0020, 0077). The Examiner notes that Voldman does not specifically disclose “serial number information, in plaintext.” However, the difference between seed data and “serial number information, in plaintext” is only found in the non-functional descriptive material and is not functionally involved in the steps recited. The steps of receiving virtual currency data including serial number information in plaintext and determining a method of encryption based on encryption condition data (i.e. serial number information) would be performed the same regardless of the descriptive material since none of the steps explicitly interact therewith. Limitations that are not functionally interrelated with the useful acts, structure, or properties of the claimed invention carry little or no patentable weight. Thus, this descriptive material will not distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art in terms of patentability, see In re Ngai, 70 USPQ2d 1862 (CAFC 2004); In re Gulack, 703 F.2d 1381, 1385, 217 USPQ 401, 404 (Fed. Cir. 1983); In re Lowry, 32 F.3d 1579, 32 USPQ2d 1031 (Fed. Cir. 1994). Therefore, it would also have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s invention to receive any type of data and use such data to determine a method of encryption because such data does not functionally relate to the steps in the method claimed and because the subjective interpretation of the data does not patentably distinguish the claimed invention. Furthermore, Voldman does not disclose: receive from a user terminal, via an electronic network, original data; transmit the virtual currency data to the user terminal via the electronic network. However, in the same field of endeavor, Mills discloses: receive from a user terminal, via an electronic network, original data (Fig. 6-7, 0035, 0103, 0112); generate virtual currency data including virtual currency encryption data which is a character string extracted, in conformity with a predetermined rule, from a character string obtained by encrypting, according to respective different methods, plaintext version of the original data which is data including at least amount information specifying a monetary value of the virtual currency data, the virtual currency data further including serial number information, in plain text, unique to each virtual currency data for distinguishing the virtual currency data from other virtual currency data...wherein the virtual currency data has a monetary value (Fig. 5b, Fig. 7, 0057, 0094-0095, 0118-0119); transmit the virtual currency data to the user terminal via the electronic network (Fig. 7, 0124); and receive the virtual currency data from a predetermined device via the electronic network (Fig. 7-8, 0137). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify claims 13 and 15 disclosed by Voldman by including receiving original data and transmitting virtual currency data generated using said original data for later receipt and validation as disclosed by Mills. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to anonymize and improve security of transactions (Mills 0040, 0193). Regarding claim 14, Voldman in view of Mills discloses all limitations of claim 7. Voldman further discloses: a virtual currency data generating device, comprising a generating device encryption means that generates virtual currency encryption data which is a character string extracted, in conformity with a predetermined rule, from a character string obtained by encrypting plaintext original data which is data including at least amount information specifying a monetary value of the virtual currency data, and thus being capable of generating virtual currency data which includes the virtual currency encryption data and is data on virtual currency having a monetary value (Fig. 3, Fig. 7a-7b, 0052, 0077-0079). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Davis (US 20170134280) generally discloses a method for hashing and storing a data value along with a shared secret to compare and validate a later received hashed package including the data value and shared secret. Kumar (US 20180315027) generally discloses a method and system for decrypting and validating an encrypted transaction hash to settle a transaction. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAYLOR RAK whose telephone number is (571)270-1575. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 11:00-7:00 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, John W Hayes can be reached at (571)-272-6708. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /T.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3697 /JOHN W HAYES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3697
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 19, 2020
Application Filed
Jun 19, 2020
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 12, 2022
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Nov 18, 2022
Response Filed
Mar 06, 2023
Final Rejection — §103
Sep 12, 2023
Request for Continued Examination
Sep 15, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 29, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Apr 02, 2024
Response Filed
Jul 13, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jan 10, 2025
Response Filed
Apr 28, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Oct 30, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Nov 06, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 08, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12591866
SYSTEM FOR OFF-CHAIN MANAGEMENT, DISTRIBUTION AND AUDITING OF DECENTRALIZED CRYPTOCURRENCY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12548009
TAPPING A CONTACTLESS CARD TO A COMPUTING DEVICE TO PROVISION A VIRTUAL NUMBER
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12524759
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR TRANSACTING OVER A NETWORK
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Patent 12483422
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR CREDENTIAL-BASED TRANSACTIONS OVER A NETWORK
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 25, 2025
Patent 12475464
UNIFIED LOGIN BIOMETRIC AUTHENTICATION SUPPORT
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 18, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

6-7
Expected OA Rounds
46%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+54.4%)
3y 8m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 128 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month