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 .
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the response filed on 10/14/2024. Claim 1 has been amended. Claim 7 has been cancelled. Claims 1, 2, 4-6 and 8-20 are currently pending and have been examined.
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, 2, 4-6 and 8-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. A Section 101 analysis is below.
Step 1 – are the claims directed to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter. The system of claim 1 is within the statutory categories of invention.
Step 2A, prong one – do the claims recite a judicial exception, which is an abstract idea enumerated in MPEP 2106, a law of nature, or a natural phenomenon. Claim 1 recites:
1. A system for automatic invoice data management, comprising:
at least one buyer terminal comprising a display and associated with a buyer,
at least one buyer payment device associated with the buyer,
at least one seller payment receiving device associated with a seller, wherein the seller payment receiving device comprises an NFC interface and wherein the seller payment receiving device is a card reader or an automatic teller machine,
at least one seller processing and/or computing device associated with the seller,
at least one central server unit, wherein the central server unit comprises at least one invoice data analysis module, and
at least one communication network,
wherein the buyer terminal, the seller payment receiving device, and the seller processing and/or computing device are each in data connection with the central server unit via the communication network,
wherein the seller payment receiving device captures invoice document data and buyer and seller metadata combined with the invoice document data and encrypts the invoice document data and the buyer and seller metadata,
wherein the buyer and seller metadata comprises information about a payment amount, the buyer, the seller, and a VAT and/or turnover tax number,
wherein the invoice data analysis module is in data connection with an invoice database unit and via the invoice data analysis module, a determination of creditworthiness and/or of a VAT rate and/or turnover tax rate is performed on the basis of the invoice document data and the buyer and seller metadata stored in the invoice database unit,
wherein the central server unit is configured to compare unique buyer profile data received via the communication network from the buyer terminal and unique seller profile Docket No. DTS20313PCTUSdata received via the communication network from the seller payment receiving device to user profiles stored on the central server unit, and the buyer terminal and the seller payment receiving device connect with the central server unit when the buyer profile data are correctly matched with the seller profile data by the central server unit, and the central server unit is further configured to process a transaction when the unique buyer profile data and the unique seller profile data match the invoice document data combined with the buyer and seller metadata,
wherein the seller payment receiving device is configured to transfer the invoice document data and the buyer and seller metadata combined with the invoice document data via the communication network to the central server unit due to at least one electronic payment transaction having been correctly performed by the buyer payment device and the seller payment receiving device,
wherein the central server unit is configured to connect the buyer terminal and the seller payment receiving device via the communication network only when the buyer profile data received via the communication network from the buyer terminal and the seller profile data received via the communication network from the seller payment receiving device match user profiles stored on the central server unit, Page 3 of 21Application No. 16/957,042 Application Filing Date: September 11, 2020
Docket No. DTS20313PCTUSwherein the central server unit is configured to store the invoice document data and automatically transfer the invoice document data from the central server unit via the communication network to the buyer terminal and the seller processing and/or computing device, and
wherein the invoice data analysis module is configured to evaluate and/or analyze invoice document data of several invoices to provide information on electronic transactions to the buyer and the seller.
Referring to the bolded limitations above, independent claim 1 is directed to an abstract idea enumerated in MPEP 2106. Specifically, claim 1 recites the abstract idea of certain methods of organizing human activity. More specifically, as drafted claim 1 only recites the simple legal or commercial interaction of automatic invoice data management after an electronic payment transaction has been performed for the purpose, as described in the specification and recited in the claims, of record keeping and tax reporting. Please see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II)(B) which discusses an example of subject matter where the commercial or legal interaction is business relations includes processing information through a clearing-house. Here, the claimed “central server unit” corresponds to a clearing house. Accordingly, claim 1 is directed to the judicial exception of an abstract idea.
Step 2A, prong two – do the claims recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. Integration of the judicial exception into a practical application requires an additional element or a combination of additional elements in the claim to apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that the claim is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception. Regarding claim 1, this claim only recites the additional elements of a buyer terminal, buyer payment device, seller payment receiving device, NFC interface, card reader, ATM, seller processing or computing device, central server unit having a database unit and data analysis module, and communication network to provide automatic invoice data management after an electronic payment transaction has been performed. The computer components are recited at a high-level of generality (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Accordingly, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Please see MPEP 2106.05(f). It is further noted that the claimed invention as recited in claim 1 does not pertain to an improvement in the functioning of the computer components themselves or a technological solution to a technological problem. Regarding the recitation of an NFC interface, ATM and card reader, it is respectfully noted that these limitations do not demonstrate that the judicial exception is applied with, or by use of, a particular machine. Please see MPEP 2106.05(b). Please also MPEP 2106.05(h) regarding field of use and technological environment and noting “limiting an abstract idea to one field of use or adding token postsolution components did not make the concept patentable”.
Step 2B – do the claims recited additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Regarding claim 1, as discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of a buyer terminal, buyer payment device, seller payment receiving device, NFC interface, card reader, ATM, seller processing or computing device, central server unit having a database unit and data analysis module, and communication network to provide automatic invoice data management after an electronic payment transaction has been performed amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The computer components implementing the abstract idea appear to be generic in view of at least paragraphs [0046]-[0054] of the Applicant’s specification.
In view of the above analysis, independent claim 1 is not patent eligible. Dependent claims 2, 4-6 and 8-20 do not cure the deficiencies in their respective base claims. Specifically, claims 2, 4-6 and 8-20 merely refine the abstract idea (2A1) by invoking a computer as a tool to perform an existing process (2A2, 2B).
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 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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 2, 4-6 and 8-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hernandez (US 2017/0193469) in view of Maenpaa (US 2014/0244462) and further in view of Bartlett (US 2013/0074164).
Claim 1 recites:
A system for automatic invoice data management, comprising: (Hernandez, Fig. 1, [0024], [0025], system 100)
at least one buyer terminal comprising a display and associated with a buyer, (Hernandez, Fig. 1, [0030], computing device of buyer 106; [0034], images may be viewable using computing system of buyer; Fig. 7, [0097], computer system 700 includes display 730)
at least one buyer payment device associated with the buyer, (Hernandez, Fig. 6, [0070], payment card or payment instrument)
at least one seller payment receiving device associated with a seller, wherein the seller payment receiving device comprises an NFC interface and wherein the seller payment receiving device is a card reader or an automatic teller machine, (Hernandez, Fig. 6, [0071], merchant 606 receives payment details via near field communication; Fig. 6, [0071], [0072], merchant 606 point of sale computing system reading on both card reader and ATM under BRI in view of paragraph [0016], [0048] of Applicant’s specification. Paragraph [0016] of the Applicant’s specification notes the card reader is a “standardized device”. However, Hernandez does not use the words “the seller payment receiving device is a card reader or an automatic teller machine”. Maenpaa, Fig. 1, [0027], discusses POS terminal 170 to swipe a payment card and read QR codes. If necessary, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Hernandez to include the POS terminal as disclosed in Maenpaa so that a shopper can use a payment card as discussed in Maenpaa, [0027], and Hernandez, [0071]. Further, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to include the features as taught in Maenpaa in Hernandez since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. Additionally, both are in the field of generating and storing digital receipts and one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the combination to be predictable.)
at least one seller processing and/or computing device associated with the seller, (Hernandez, Fig. 1, [0034], computing device of seller 108)
at least one central server unit, wherein the central server unit comprises at least one invoice data analysis module, and (Hernandez, Fig. 1, [0024], [0025], system 100 includes processing server 102; [0040], modules to perform functions of the processing device including invoicing module 216)
at least one communication network, wherein the buyer terminal, the seller payment receiving device, and the seller processing and/or computing device are each in data connection with the central server unit via the communication network, (Hernandez, Fig. 1, [0047], processing server 102 includes transmitting device 220 to transmit data over one or more networks to regulatory agencies 104, buyers 106, sellers 108, payment networks 110, financial institutions and other entities; see also [0030], [0038], [0092], communication networks such as Internet)
wherein the seller payment receiving device captures invoice document data and buyer and seller metadata combined with the invoice document data and encrypts the invoice document data and the buyer and seller metadata, wherein the buyer and seller metadata comprises information about a payment amount, the buyer, the seller, and a VAT and/or turnover tax number, (Hernandez, [0022], transaction details; Fig. 1, [0026], transaction data from seller 108; [0030], additional invoicing data including buyers name; Fig. 1, [0031] invoice includes data including data required by regulatory agency 104 including tax identification number; [0049], encryption; Fig. 6, [0072], transaction details entered into point of sale system. Fig. 3, [0072], transaction details include amount, merchant, consumer. Hernandez does not specifically disclose a VAT and/or turnover tax number. Maenpaa, [0046], discusses VAT. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the tax of Hernandez to be a VAT tax as in Maenpaa so that the appropriate tax entity can be identified as discussed in Hernandez, [0001].). Although Hernandez, [0049], discusses encryption keys, Hernandez and Maenpaa do not specifically disclose encrypting the invoice document data and buyer and seller metadata. Bartlett, [0128], discusses information sent or received by communication channel may be encrypted. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the encryption of Hernandez as modified by Maenpaa to include encryption of information sent over communications channels as in Bartlett in order to ensure privacy and prevent fraud as is well known in the art as discussed in Bartlett, [0136]. It is further respectfully submitted that paragraph [0038] the Applicant’s specification only discloses conventional encryption methods. Further, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to include the features as taught in Bartlett in Hernandez as modified by Maenpaa since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.)
wherein the invoice data analysis module is in data connection with an invoice database unit and via the invoice data analysis module, a determination of creditworthiness and/or of a VAT rate and/or turnover tax rate is performed on the basis of the invoice document data and the buyer and seller metadata stored in the invoice database unit, (Hernandez, [0044], invoicing module 216, database, taxable entity, rules and regulations from regulatory agency 104; [0024], regulatory agency 104 may be tax authority; [0080], available credit)
wherein the central server unit is configured to compare unique buyer profile data received via the communication network from the buyer terminal and unique seller profile Docket No. DTS20313PCTUSdata received via the communication network from the seller payment receiving device to user profiles stored on the central server unit, and the buyer terminal and the seller payment receiving device connect with the central server unit when the buyer profile data are correctly matched with the seller profile data by the central server unit, and the central server unit is further configured to process a transaction when the unique buyer profile data and the unique seller profile data match the invoice document data combined with the buyer and seller metadata, (Hernandez, Fig. 1, [0027], [0028], processing server 102, process transaction, identify buyer 106, seller 108, identify if transaction data corresponds to transaction account information and Fig. 1 further shows the buyer 106 and seller 108 are connected; Fig. 2, [0041]-[0043], processing server 102 includes entity database 206, invoice database 210; Fig. 2, [0046], querying module 214, transaction processing module 218. Hernandez and Maenpaa do not specifically disclose the buyer terminal and the seller payment receiving device connect with the central server unit when the buyer profile data are correctly matched with the seller profile data by the central server unit. Bartlett, [0062], discusses enhancing security between a client and a server by matching profiles before granting access. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the communication of Hernandez as modified by Maenpaa to include profile matching before granting access as in Bartlett in order to enhance security as discussed in Hernandez, [0077], and Bartlett, [0062].)
wherein the seller payment receiving device is configured to transfer the invoice document data and the buyer and seller metadata combined with the invoice document data via the communication network to the central server unit due to at least one electronic payment transaction having been correctly performed by the buyer payment device and the seller payment receiving device, (Hernandez, Fig. 1, [0026], transaction data from seller 108; Fig. 6, [0071]-[0073], step 622, present payment card, step 624, enters transaction details including through optical scanning)
wherein the central server unit is configured to connect the buyer terminal and the seller payment receiving device via the communication network only when the buyer profile data received via the communication network from the buyer terminal and the seller profile data received via the communication network from the seller payment receiving device match user profiles stored on the central server unit, (Hernandez, Fig. 1, [0027], [0028], identify if transaction data corresponds to transaction account information and Fig. 1 further shows the buyer 106 and seller 108 are connected; Fig. 2, [0041]-[0043], processing server 102 includes entity database 206, invoice database 210, querying module 214. Hernandez and Maenpaa do not specifically disclose connect the buyer terminal and the seller payment receiving device via the communication network only when the buyer profile data received via the communication network from the buyer terminal and the seller profile data received via the communication network from the seller payment receiving device match user profiles stored on the central server unit. Bartlett, [0062], discusses enhancing security between a client and a server by matching profiles before granting access. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the communication of Hernandez as modified by Maenpaa to include profile matching before granting access as in Bartlett in order to enhance security as discussed in Hernandez, [0077], and Bartlett, [0062].)
wherein the central server unit is configured to store the invoice document data and automatically transfer the invoice document data from the central server unit via the communication network to the buyer terminal and the seller processing and/or computing device, and (Hernandez, Fig. 2, [0042], invoice database; Fig. 2, [0044], [0045], processing server 102 includes invoicing module 216 that generates invoice for buyer 206; [0048], transmitting device 220 transmits invoices to buyer 106, seller 108)
wherein the invoice data analysis module is configured to evaluate and/or analyze invoice document data of several invoices to provide information on electronic transactions to the buyer and the seller. (Hernandez, [0034], data included in electronic invoices, transmitted to buyer 106, seller 108; Fig. 2, [0042], electronic invoices 212; see also [0045], [0048])
Claim 2 recites:
The system for automatic invoice data management according to claim 1, wherein a history of the invoice document data is tracked via the invoice data analysis module. (Hernandez, Fig. 2, [0042]-[0044], invoice data base 210 may be relational database for storage, identification, updating, etc, invoicing module 216)
Claim 4 recites:
The system for automatic invoice data management according to claim 1, wherein the buyer terminal is a personal computer, a tablet computer, a smartphone, and/or a smartwatch, and (Hernandez, [0030], computing device of buyer 106)
the buyer payment device is a debit card. (Hernandez, [0020], debit card)
Claim 5 recites:
The system for automatic invoice data management according to claim 1, wherein the central server unit stores buyer bank account data and seller bank account data, each of which are combined with buyer profile data and seller profile data by the central server unit. (Hernandez, Fig. 2, [0041], processing server 102 includes entity database 206; Fig. 2, [0046], querying module 214, transaction processing module 218)
Claim 6 recites:
The system for automatic invoice data management according to claim 5, wherein the central server unit is configured to combine the buyer profile data and the seller profile data with respective invoice document data to result in buyer link data and seller link data. (Hernandez, Fig. 2, [0042], invoice database 210; Fig. 2, [0045], [0046], invoicing module)
Claim 8 recites:
The system for automatic invoice data management according to claim 1, wherein as a result of confirmation of a payment amount by a buyer and a seller and due to at least one electronic payment transaction having been correctly performed, the invoice document data and/or retailer receipt data Page 5 of 10Preliminary Amendment for Docket No. DTS20313PCTUSof at least one card transaction is automatically transferred via the seller payment receiving device via the communication network to the central server unit and is transferred back to the buyer terminal and the seller processing and/or computing device. (Hernandez, Fig. 2, [0045], [0046], invoicing module 216)
Claim 9 recites:
The system for automatic invoice data management according to claim 2, wherein the central server unit is configured to automatically calculate turnover and/or VAT data on a basis of the invoice document data and combine the turnover and/or VAT data with the invoice document data. (Hernandez, [0044], electronic invoice may be generated based on additional data, such as rules and regulations transmitted by the regulatory agency 104. Hernandez does not specifically disclose a turnover and/or VAT data. Maenpaa, [0046], discusses VAT data. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the rules and regulations of Hernandez to be VAT data as in Maenpaa so that the appropriate tax entity can be identified as discussed in Hernandez, [0001].)
Claim 10 recites:
The system for automatic invoice data management according to claim 2, wherein the central server unit is configured to automatically calculate the VAT and/or turnover tax rates and currencies of a country on a basis of the invoice document data and combine the VAT and/or turnover tax rates and currencies of a country with the invoice document data. (Hernandez, [0044], electronic invoice may be generated based on additional data, such as rules and regulations transmitted by the regulatory agency 104. Hernandez does not specifically disclose VAT and/or turnover tax rates and currencies of a country on a basis of the invoice document data and combine the VAT and/or turnover tax rates and currencies of a country with the invoice document data. Maenpaa, [0043], discusses currency type used and Maenpaa, [0046], discusses VAT data. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the rules and regulations of Hernandez to be currency and VAT data as in Maenpaa so that the appropriate tax entity can be identified as discussed in Hernandez, [0030].)
Claim 11 recites:
The system for automatic invoice data management according to claim 1, wherein the central server unit is configured to combine the buyer profile data with at least one buyer email account and combine the seller profile data with at least one seller email account, so that corresponding invoice document data are automatically transferred to a buyer and a seller via email via the central server unit via the communication network to the buyer terminal and the seller processing and/or computing device. (Hernandez, [0030], [0041], entity address; Figs. 1 and 2, [0047], [0048], transmitting device 220 transmits electronic invoices to buyer 106, seller 108. Hernandez does not specifically disclose email accounts. Maenpaa, [0042], discusses email. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the entity address and transmission of Hernandez includes email as in Maenpaa as email is a wallet account identifier as discussed in Maenpaa, [0042].)
Claim 12 recites:
The system for automatic invoice data management according to claim 11, wherein the central server unit is configured to combine the buyer profile data and the seller profile data with further email accounts, so that invoice document data can be transferred via email to a tax consultant, an auditor, a tax office or an airport department for turnover and VAT matters. (Hernandez, Figs. 1 and 2, [0047], [0048], transmitting device 220 transmits electronic invoices to regulatory agency 104 and other suitable entities using suitable communication network. Hernandez does not specifically disclose email accounts. Maenpaa, [0042], discusses email. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the transmission of Hernandez to include email as in Maenpaa as email is a wallet account identifier as discussed in Maenpaa, [0042].)
Claim 13 recites:
The system for automatic invoice data management according to claim 11, wherein invoice document data sent to the Page 6 of 10Preliminary Amendment for Docket No. DTS20313PCTUSbuyer and the seller via email are manually stored in the central server unit by the buyer and the seller through the buyer terminal and the seller processing and/or computing device. (Hernandez, Fig. 2, [0045], [0049], memory 222)
Claim 14 recites:
The system for automatic invoice data management according to claim 1, wherein the invoice document data manually selected by a buyer and a seller are deleted through the buyer terminal and the seller processing and/or computing device. (Hernandez, Fig. 1, [0031], format and content of may be based on criteria of buyer; [0034], format and content electronic invoice image is based on the entity to whom the image is being electronically transmitted including buyer 106)
Claim 15 recites:
The system for automatic invoice data management according to claim 1, wherein the central server unit is configured to combine the buyer profile data with at least one buyer user name and at least one buyer password and combine the seller profile data with at least one seller user name and at least one seller password. (Hernandez, Fig. 1, [0030], [0031], invoicing data includes name and authentication information; Fig. 2, [0041], entity database)
Claim 16 recites:
The system for automatic invoice data management according to claim 2, wherein the invoice document data are categorized in storage folders on the central server unit. (Hernandez, Fig. 2, [0042], invoice database 210 is relational database of structured data sets)
Claim 17 recites:
The system for automatic invoice data management according to claim 1, wherein the central server unit comprises a search engine module, and wherein the central server unit is searchable according to specific search criteria which are transferred to the search engine module via the buyer terminal and/or the seller processing and/or computing device via the communication network. (Hernandez, Fig. 2, [0043], querying module 214 of processing server 102)
Claim 18 recites:
The system for automatic invoice data management according to claim 2, wherein the central server unit, on the basis of the invoice document data, is configured to automatically consider a debit order with discount and/or abatement and combines the debit order with the discount and/or the abatement with the invoice document data. (Hernandez, [0062], discount)
Claim 19 recites:
The system for automatic invoice data management according to claim 1, wherein the buyer terminal comprises an NFC interface. (Hernandez, [0071], near field communication)
Claim 20 recites:
The system for automatic invoice data management according to claim 1, wherein the seller payment receiving device encrypts the invoice document data and buyer and seller metadata prior to transferring data to the central server unit. (Hernandez, [0022], receiving device 202 decodes data; [0047], encoding; [0049], encryption; [0071], cryptograms)
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/14/2024 have been fully considered and are addressed below.
Regarding the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101, Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding the arguments concerning Step 2A, prong one, the certain methods of organizing human activity grouping of abstract ideas includes legal or commercial interactions. As recited in the claims, the invention is directed to automatic invoice data management, which is clearly within the groupings of abstract ideas discussed in MPEP 2106. Please see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II)(B) which discusses an example of subject matter where the commercial or legal interaction is business relations includes processing information through a clearing-house. Regarding the argument “ the configuration of claim 1, as amended herein, includes “wherein the seller payment receiving device captures invoice document data and buyer and seller metadata combined with the invoice document data and encrypts the invoice document data and the buyer and seller metadata, wherein the buyer and seller metadata comprises information about a payment amount, the buyer, the seller, and a VAT and/or turnover tax number.” This element provides a technical benefit of including certain information related to the transaction as metadata”. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. No technical description of “metadata” is recited in claims or discussed in the specification other than the metadata is a payment amount, the buyer, the seller, and a VAT and/or turnover tax number. It is It is respectfully submitted that these features merely implement the abstract idea using generic computer components, which does not preclude a claim from reciting an abstract idea.
Regarding Applicant’s arguments regarding Step 2A, prong two, integration into a practical application requires an additional element or a combination of additional elements in the claim to apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that the claim is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception. Limitations that are indicative of integration into a practical application include improvements to the functioning of a computer, applying the judicial exception with a particular machine, effecting transformation of a particular article to a different state or thing or applying the judicial exception in some other meaningful was beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment. It is respectfully submitted that the feature cited by the Applicants, NFC interface, encryption and automated data comparison and matching, are mere instructions to apply an exception. Please see MPEP 2106.05(f), which discusses a commonplace business method or mathematical algorithm being applied on a general purpose computer is an example where the courts have found to be the additional elements to be mere instructions to apply an exception, because they do no more than merely invoke computers or machinery as a tool to perform an existing process. Please also see MPEP 2106.05(g) discussing insignificant extra-solution activity including mere data gathering. Regarding NFC and encryption, no improvements to either NFC or encryption technology are discussed in the specification or recited in the claims. Regarding the data comparison and matching, in view of that claim 1 recites the invoice already exists and is received by the seller receiving device, and the payment transaction has already “been correctly performed”, it is unclear what improvement to technology is being effected by matching a seller and buyer for an already completed transaction that has an invoice. Regarding NFC interface and card reader or ATM being a particular machine, please see MPEP 2106.05(b)(III) discussing use of a machine that contributes only nominally or insignificantly to the execution of the claimed method (e.g., in a data gathering step or in a field-of-use limitation) would not integrate a judicial exception or provide significantly more. The NFC interface and card reader or ATM contribute only nominally or insignificantly.
Regarding Applicant’s arguments regarding Step 2B, Step 2B is directed to whether the claim recites additional elements that amount to an inventive concept (AKA “significantly more”) than the judicial exception. It is respectfully submitted that the features cited by the Applicants, "secure NFC interface, encryption, automated profile matching, and real-time data transfer" are all known activities. Please see MPEP 2106.05(d). MPEP 2106.05(d) gives examples recognized by the courts of known computer functions including “receiving or transmitting data over a network”, “electronic recordkeeping”, “storing and retrieving information in memory” and “recording a customer’s order”, all of which directly correspond to the generically claimed operations of the present claims, which claim automatic invoice data management after an electronic payment transaction has been performed.
Regarding the prior art rejections, Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered and the amended claims are addressed in detail above. The Applicant argues “Hernandez does not disclose that the seller payment receiving device is configured to transfer the invoice document data and the buyer and seller metadata combined with the invoice document data via the communication network to the central server unit due to at least one electronic payment transaction having been correctly performed by the buyer payment device and the seller payment receiving device, as required by amended claim 1.” The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Hernandez, Fig. 6, [0071]-[0073], discloses that at step 622, payment card is presented, and subsequently at step 624, transaction details are entered including through optical scanning. Hernandez, [0040], discusses modules to perform functions of the processing device including invoicing module 216. Hernandez, [0044], discusses invoicing module 216 uses a database associated with a taxable entity, and rules and regulations from regulatory agency 104. Hernandez, [0034], discusses data included in electronic invoices is transmitted to the buyer 106 and seller 108. Please also see Hernandez, Fig. 2, [0042], electronic invoices 212; and Hernandez, [0045], [0048]. Regarding the arguments regarding encryption, the Applicant admits in Applicant’s specification, [0038], that the system utilizes known encryption methods. In response to Applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure includes:
Smith (US 2004/0225602) discusses financial transactions using NFC, [0023].
Bouricius (US 4,302,810) discusses encrypted financial data, 6:40-6:50.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Gregory Harper whose telephone number is (571)272-5481. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Th 7am-5pm.
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, Calvin Hewitt II can be reached at (571) 272-6709. 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.
/GREGORY HARPER/Examiner, Art Unit 3692 /DAVID P SHARVIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3692
Prosecution Insights