Remarks
Claims 1-5, 8-12, 15-18, and 21-26 are pending.
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 1/16/2026 has been entered.
Claim Interpretation
The claims include subject matter that has no effect on the scope of the claims. For example, claim 1 states “receive and display customer service web content from the service provider system, wherein the content is delivered following server-side validation of the cryptogram”. However, “wherein the content is delivered following server-side validation of the cryptogram” has no bearing on the scope of the claim, since the claim only includes receiving and displaying. Thus, delivery of the content from the server following server side validation is outside the scope of the claim. The language at the end of the claim reading “thereby providing the pre-authentication number to a Customer Relationship Management (CRM) server to enable the call to bypass an authorization step and enter a call handling queue” has the same issue. All independent claims have this issue. This is exemplary.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to Applicant’s allegations on page 13 regarding, the claim does not prohibit receiving the pre-authentication number from a server prior to storing it (e.g., in a card) and using it. In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., the customer provides the pre authentication number independently, without first receiving it from the system/server) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
With respect to the limitation being argued, (receiving the pre authentication number from the contactless card), the combination discloses this as follows:
Regarding Claim 1,
Gray discloses …
…
Receive customer information comprising a call center contact address and a pre authentication number, wherein the pre authentication number is a unique value distinct from the cryptogram (Exemplary Citations: for example, Column 2, line 21 to Column 3, line 17; Column 10, line 36 to Column 11, line 11; Column 12, lines 26-50; and associated figures; receiving information, such as a number associated with the call center, phone number for representative/call center, session code, session ID, etc., as examples);
…
Tunnell, however, discloses …
Establish a second communication session with the contactless card when a phone number is needed (Exemplary Citations: for example, Paragraphs 44-56, 59, 62, 78, 96-101, 105-108, 121, 122, 158, 159, 163-165, 171, 176, 189, 192, 203, and associated figures; contacting card another time, for example); and
That the customer information is received from the contactless card (Exemplary Citations: for example, Paragraphs 44-56, 59, 62, 78, 96-101, 105-108, 121, 122, 158, 159, 163-165, 171, 176, 189, 192, 203, and associated figures; receiving the customer information, such as phone numbers, account numbers, authentication codes, etc., from the card, for example). …
Singh, however, discloses …
…
Receive customer information comprising a call center contact address and a pre authentication number, wherein the pre authentication number is a unique value distinct from the cryptogram (Exemplary Citations: for example, Page 5, first and second full paragraphs, page 6, first full paragraph, page 7, first full paragraph, page 9, only paragraph through page 11, second full paragraph, page 13, first full paragraph through page 14, first full paragraph, page 16, first full paragraph through page 17, first partial paragraph, page 17, final paragraph through paragraph 18, first full paragraph, page 19, first full paragraph through page 21, last full paragraph, page 23, third full paragraph, page 25, first full paragraph through page 26, first paragraph, page 27, second full paragraph through page 29, first full paragraph, paragraph spanning pages 29-30, and associated figures; phone number and authentication code, DNIS, or the like, being received, for example);
…
With respect to Applicant’s allegations in the first full paragraph on page 14, Singh does not only disclose manual entering of phone numbers for phone calls, but rather, Singh also allows for automatically generated calls (e.g., in clicking a contact us button or a phone number hyperlink or the like (e.g., page 10)). Moreover, Singh discloses storing of the authentication code (e.g., page 27). The primary reference, Gray, already discloses automated calling techniques, and the secondary reference, Tunnell, already discloses that information may come from a contactless card. Indeed, the device may perform the combining simply by receiving data and storing it in memory prior to transmission and/or usage thereof. For example, in storing the bits “01010”, the computer stores a 0 and appends (combines) a 1 and appends (combines) a 0 and appends (combines) a 1 and appends (combines) a 0. The claims provide no special mechanism by which the numbers are combined that is any different than the combination works. In fact, the combination includes the species of appending to the claimed combining.
With respect to Applicant’s allegations in the final paragraph on page 14 and first paragraph on page 15, Applicant fails to cite any language in the claim that explicitly prevents interception. Indeed, claim 1 uses the pre-authentication number to initiate a phone call. Moreover, as noted above, the claims do not prohibit the server sending the pre-authentication number beforehand.
With respect to Applicant’s allegations in the second paragraph on page 15, the claims do not require “storing in the contactless card a pre-authentication number that is distinct from authentication information for an authentication process”. In fact, the pre-authentication information is itself authentication information for an authentication process. While the claim does state that the pre-authentication number is distinct from the cryptogram, this is found in the rejection below. As Applicant did not argue this, no further response is necessary.
Examiner’s Note
It is noted that the IDS filed 1/28/2026 contains a large number of references for consideration by the Examiner. If the applicant and/or applicant’s representative is aware of any particular reference or portion of a reference in the list which the examiner should pay particular attention to, it is requested that it be specifically pointed out in response to this office action.
Information Disclosure Statement(s)
Mooney v. Brunswick Corp. (Mooney v. Brunswick Corp., 663 F.2d 724, 212 U.S.P.Q. 401, 407 (7th Cir. 1981)) states the following:
Mooney's reissue application cited 56 prior art references (including the Kiekhaefer drawing and the Gale Products drawing) but in no purported order of importance. The letter which accompanied the application similarly failed to disclose which references were most relevant to the patentability of the gear structure. Ordinarily, an examiner specifies the pertinent prior art references in the Office Action, but neither the Kiekhaefer drawing nor the Gale Products drawing were listed by the examiner in the Office Action in this case. Considering the large number of references which were included on the patent examiner's list, we do not think it unreasonable for the district court to have concluded that the examiner failed to consider these drawings as relevant prior art. As a result, the statutory presumption of validity which may be enhanced when prior art has been considered and rejected by the Patent Office is dissipated in Mooney's case with respect to the Kiekhaefer drawing and the Gale Products drawing. Compare Ortho Pharmaceutical Corp. v. American Hospital Supply Corp., 534 F.2d 89 (7th Cir. 1976) and Tracor, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 519 F.2d 1288 (7th Cir. 1975) with Chicago Rawhide Manufacturing Co. v. Crane Packing Co., supra.
Thus, 56 references has been found by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit to be large enough to be considered a “large number of references” and that it is not “unreasonable … to have concluded that the examiner failed to consider these drawings as relevant prior art” with respect to 2 drawings buried within the 56 references. It is noted that “these drawings” could be any portion of any document within an IDS.
Therefore, the IDS or set of IDSes dated 1/28/2026 in the current application that contains at least 56 references is clearly also considered to have a large number of references and it is not unreasonable to conclude that the examiner cannot consider everything within these documents.
As discussed in Ecto World, LLC v. RAI Strategic Holdings, Inc. (Ecto World, LLC v. RAI Strategic Holdings, Inc., IPR2024-01280, Paper 13 (May 19, 2025)):
Most IDS submissions contain fewer than 25 references. See Setting and Adjusting Patent Fees During Fiscal Year 2025, 89 FR 91898 at 91924 (Nov. 20, 2024) (“Approximately 87% of applications contain 50 or fewer applicant-provided items of information, and approximately 77% contain fewer than 25 . . . [O]nly 4% of applications contain more than 200 applicant-provided items of information.”).
It was decided in Ecto World, LLC v. RAI Strategic Holdings, Inc. that, since the IDS was large, even though the Examiner signed the IDS as considered (please see PTAB response referenced therein as well as file history for the application), the size of the IDS warranted further consideration since the Examiner may not have fully considered everything therein. Indeed, Examiners do not have time to review every reference in a large IDS.
Therefore, for the above reasons that the current IDS or set of IDSes is considered large and the fact that the USPTO as well as Federal Circuit believe that examiners cannot review every reference in a large IDS, this IDS or set of IDSes cannot be considered.
Applicant is hereby requested to call the Examiner’s attention to particular references and portions of references that the Examiner should pay particular attention to.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 8, and 15 objected to because of the following informalities:
There is no conjunction (e.g., “and” or “or”) at the end of the penultimate limitation of claim 1. Thus, it is unclear whether only one (“or”) or all (“and”) limitation is/are required by the claim. Claims 8 and 15 have the same issue.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Claims 1-5, 8-12, 15-18, and 21-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gray (U.S. Patent 11,100,548) in view of Tunnell (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2018/0018704), Singh (WO 2015/013265), and Breekel (Breekel et al., “EMV in a Nutshell”, June 29, 2016, pp. 1-37).
Regarding Claim 1,
Gray discloses a non-transitory computer-readable media embodied with programming code, that when executed by a processor of a client device causes the processor to:
Provide, via a network interface, a support request to a service provider system to access call center services (Exemplary Citations: for example, Column 2, lines 21-43; Column 4, lines 12-33; Column 9, lines 52-65; Column 11, line 47 to Column 12, line 41; and associated figures; any sort of request for support to access call center services, such as touching a contact me button, using a website, looking at a particular product in an app/website, help menu, contact menu, etc., as examples);
In response to a prompt from the service provider system, retrieve a first set of authentication information and transmit the first set of authentication information to the service provider system (Exemplary Citations: for example, Column 2, line 21 to Column 3, line 17; Column 4, line 12 to Column 5, line 2; Column 7, line 47 to Column 8, line 49; Column 9, line 52 to Column 10, line 35; Column 10, line 36 to Column 11, line 11; Column 11, line 47 to Column 13, line 3; and associated figures; authentication information to server, for example);
Receive and display customer service web content from the service provider system (Exemplary Citations: for example, Column 2, lines 21-58; Column 4, line 12 to Column 5, line 2; Column 9, line 51 to Column 10, line 35; Column 11, line 47 to Column 12, line 41; and associated figures; any web content displayed, for example, a waiting time estimation, an option to choose to wait, call back later, or get a call from a rep, etc., as examples);
In response to a prompt within the displayed customer service web content, begin a process by which to initiate a call to call center services (Exemplary Citations: for example, Column 2, lines 21-58; Column 4, line 12 to Column 5, line 2; Column 9, line 51 to Column 10, line 35; Column 11, line 47 to Column 12, line 41; and associated figures; the prompt may be an option to call, an option to choose to wait, call back later, or get a call from a rep, etc., as examples);
Receive customer information comprising a call center contact address and a pre authentication number, wherein the pre authentication number is a unique value distinct from the cryptogram (Exemplary Citations: for example, Column 2, line 21 to Column 3, line 17; Column 10, line 36 to Column 11, line 11; Column 12, lines 26-50; and associated figures; receiving information, such as a number associated with the call center, phone number for representative/call center, session code, session ID, etc., as examples);
Initiate a call to the call center services using the call center contact address and the pre authentication number, thereby providing the pre authentication number to a customer relationship management server to enable the call to bypass an authorization step and enter a call handling queue (Exemplary Citations: for example, Column 2, line 21 to Column 3, line 17; Column 4, lines 34-51; Column 9, line 52 to Column 10, line 21; Column 10, line 47 to Column 11, line 11; Column 12, line 26 to Column 13, line 3; and associated figures; calling customer service based on the numbers described above, such as by using the same session ID and/or code to continue the data session in the phone call, for example; call forwarded directly to relevant representative, skipping username/password authentication at the server side, for example);
But does not explicitly disclose that the authentication information comprises a cryptogram from a contactless card via a short range wireless communication link establishing a first communication session, wherein the content is delivered following server side validation of the cryptogram, In response to a prompt within the displayed customer service web content, establish a second communication session with the contactless card, that the customer information is received from the contactless card, and automatically combine the pre authentication number with the call center contact address to generate an augmented contact string.
Tunnell, however, discloses receiving the first set of authentication information from a contactless card via a short range wireless communication link establishing a first communication session (Exemplary Citations: for example, Paragraphs 44-56, 59, 62, 78, 96-101, 105-108, 121, 122, 158, 159, 163-165, 171, 176, 189, 192, 203, and associated figures; receiving the customer information, such as phone numbers, account numbers, authentication codes, etc., from the card (e.g., wireless card, smartcard that uses wireless communications, loyalty card, or many other cards with many other wireless protocols, for example), for example);
Establish a second communication session with the contactless card when a phone number is needed (Exemplary Citations: for example, Paragraphs 44-56, 59, 62, 78, 96-101, 105-108, 121, 122, 158, 159, 163-165, 171, 176, 189, 192, 203, and associated figures; contacting card another time, for example); and
That the customer information is received from the contactless card (Exemplary Citations: for example, Paragraphs 44-56, 59, 62, 78, 96-101, 105-108, 121, 122, 158, 159, 163-165, 171, 176, 189, 192, 203, and associated figures; receiving the customer information, such as phone numbers, account numbers, authentication codes, etc., from the card, for example). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s invention, which is before any effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the card based storage, retrieval, and access techniques of Tunnell into the calling party authentication system of Gray in order to allow the system to make use of smart cards for storage, which provide secure, portable storage, to provide a variety of information in such cards, thus allowing access to a wide variety of additional data as necessary, to allow use of many well-known and widely-used protocols for communication, thereby increasing extensibility in the system, and/or to increase security in the system.
Singh, however, discloses automatically combine the pre authentication number with the call center contact address to generate an augmented contact string (Citations: for example, page 13, first full paragraph through page 14, first full paragraph; appending authentication code to phone number, or the last digits being appended to the previous portions of a phone number in a DNIS in a pool of DNIS, as examples);
That the call is initiated using the augmented contact string (Citations: for example, page 13, first full paragraph through page 14, first full paragraph; call using the above appended number plus pre-authentication number, for example). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s invention, which is before any effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the device, app, and customer service linking techniques of Singh into the calling party authentication system of Gray as modified by Tunnell in order to allow for use of authentication codes within phone numbers, allow for use of DNIS pools, to provide for additional authentication attempts upon failure, to ensure that a client calling in is authentic solely based on a dialed number, and/or to increase security in the system.
Singh also discloses provide, via a network interface, a support request to a service provider system to access call center services (Exemplary Citations: for example, Page 5, first and second full paragraphs, page 6, first full paragraph, page 7, first full paragraph, page 9, only paragraph through page 11, second full paragraph, page 13, first full paragraph through page 14, first full paragraph, page 16, first full paragraph through page 17, first partial paragraph, page 17, final paragraph through paragraph 18, first full paragraph, page 19, first full paragraph through page 21, last full paragraph, page 23, third full paragraph, page 25, first full paragraph through page 26, first paragraph, page 27, second full paragraph through page 29, first full paragraph, paragraph spanning pages 29-30, and associated figures; click help, FAQs, etc., as examples);
In response to a prompt from the service provider system, retrieve a first set of authentication information and transmit the first set of authentication information to the service provider system (Exemplary Citations: for example, Page 5, first and second full paragraphs, page 6, first full paragraph, page 7, first full paragraph, page 9, only paragraph through page 11, second full paragraph, page 13, first full paragraph through page 14, first full paragraph, page 16, first full paragraph through page 17, first partial paragraph, page 17, final paragraph through paragraph 18, first full paragraph, page 19, first full paragraph through page 21, last full paragraph, page 23, third full paragraph, page 25, first full paragraph through page 26, first paragraph, page 27, second full paragraph through page 29, first full paragraph, paragraph spanning pages 29-30, and associated figures; login with login, details, authentication code, and/or passphrase, or other authentications, as examples);
Receive and display customer service web content from the service provider system (Exemplary Citations: for example, Page 5, first and second full paragraphs, page 6, first full paragraph, page 7, first full paragraph, page 9, only paragraph through page 11, second full paragraph, page 13, first full paragraph through page 14, first full paragraph, page 16, first full paragraph through page 17, first partial paragraph, page 17, final paragraph through paragraph 18, first full paragraph, page 19, first full paragraph through page 21, last full paragraph, page 23, third full paragraph, page 25, first full paragraph through page 26, first paragraph, page 27, second full paragraph through page 29, first full paragraph, paragraph spanning pages 29-30, and associated figures; any content, such as help screens, FAQs, information about phone calls, etc., as examples);
Receive customer information comprising a call center contact address and a pre authentication number, wherein the pre authentication number is a unique value distinct from the cryptogram (Exemplary Citations: for example, Page 5, first and second full paragraphs, page 6, first full paragraph, page 7, first full paragraph, page 9, only paragraph through page 11, second full paragraph, page 13, first full paragraph through page 14, first full paragraph, page 16, first full paragraph through page 17, first partial paragraph, page 17, final paragraph through paragraph 18, first full paragraph, page 19, first full paragraph through page 21, last full paragraph, page 23, third full paragraph, page 25, first full paragraph through page 26, first paragraph, page 27, second full paragraph through page 29, first full paragraph, paragraph spanning pages 29-30, and associated figures; phone number and authentication code, DNIS, or the like, being received, for example);
Automatically combine the pre authentication number with the call center contact address to generate an augmented contact string (Citations: for example, page 13, first full paragraph through page 14, first full paragraph; appending authentication code to phone number, or the last digits being appended to the previous portions of a phone number in a DNIS in a pool of DNIS, as examples);
Initiate a call to the call center services using the call center contact address and the pre authentication number, thereby providing the pre authentication number to a customer relationship management server to enable the call to bypass an authorization step and enter a call handling queue (Exemplary Citations: for example, Page 5, first and second full paragraphs, page 6, first full paragraph, page 7, first full paragraph, page 9, only paragraph through page 11, second full paragraph, page 13, first full paragraph through page 14, first full paragraph, page 16, first full paragraph through page 17, first partial paragraph, page 17, final paragraph through paragraph 18, first full paragraph, page 19, first full paragraph through page 21, last full paragraph, page 23, third full paragraph, page 25, first full paragraph through page 26, first paragraph, page 27, second full paragraph through page 29, first full paragraph, paragraph spanning pages 29-30, and associated figures; call DNIS or phone number appended with authentication code, for example; skip re-authentication, for example). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s invention, which is before any effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the device, app, and customer service linking techniques of Singh into the calling party authentication system of Gray as modified by Tunnell in order to allow for use of authentication codes within phone numbers, allow for use of DNIS pools, to provide for additional authentication attempts upon failure, to ensure that a client calling in is authentic solely based on a dialed number, and/or to increase security in the system.
Breekel, however, discloses that the authentication information comprises a cryptogram from a contactless card via a short range wireless communication link establishing a first communication session (Exemplary Citations: for example, Sections 2.2, 2.3.4.1, 4.4.3, 4.5.2, pages 10, 15, 28, and 33; receiving, from card, cryptogram accessed via NFC between card and device, where a server-based transaction is occurring, for example); and
That the content is delivered following server side validation of the cryptogram (Exemplary Citations: for example, Sections 2.2, 2.3.4.1, 4.4.3, 4.5.2, pages 10, 15, 28, and 33; server verifies cryptogram for authentication, for example). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicant’s invention, which is before any effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the authentication techniques of Breekel into the calling party authentication system of Gray as modified by Tunnell and Singh in order to allow the system to use additional authentication mechanisms, to provide for a more secure authentication, to reduce fraud, and/or to allow for cards and to be used to aid in authentication of a system and a user.
Regarding Claim 8,
Claim 8 is a method claim that corresponds to media claim 1 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding Claim 15,
Claim 15 is a device claim that is broader than media claim 1 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding Claim 2,
Gray as modified by Tunnell, Singh, and Breekel discloses the media of claim 1, in addition, Gray discloses that the contactless card generates the pre authentication number in response to a communication with the client device (Exemplary Citations: for example, Column 2, line 21 to Column 3, line 17; Column 10, line 36 to Column 11, line 11; Column 12, lines 26-50; and associated figures; session ID , authentication code, and the like, can be generated anew per session, for example); and
Tunnell discloses that the contactless card generates the pre authentication number in response to a communication with the client device (Exemplary Citations: for example, Paragraphs 44-56, 59, 62, 78, 96-101, 105-108, 121, 122, 158, 159, 163-167, 171, 176, 189, 192, 200, 202, 203, and associated figures; dynamic codes, for example).
Regarding Claim 9,
Claim 9 is a method claim that corresponds to media claim 2 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding Claim 16,
Claim 16 is a device claim that is broader than media claim 2 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding Claim 3,
Gray as modified by Tunnell, Singh, and Breekel discloses the media of claim 1, in addition, Gray discloses that in response to a subsequent support request, the contactless card changes the pre authentication number from a previous pre authentication number (Exemplary Citations: for example, Column 2, line 21 to Column 3, line 17; Column 10, line 36 to Column 11, line 11; Column 12, lines 26-50; and associated figures; session ID , authentication code, and the like, can be generated anew per session, for example); and
Tunnel discloses that in response to a subsequent support request, the contactless card changes the pre authentication number from a previous pre authentication number (Exemplary Citations: for example, Paragraphs 44-56, 59, 62, 78, 96-101, 105-108, 121, 122, 158, 159, 163-167, 171, 176, 189, 192, 200, 202, 203, and associated figures; dynamic codes, for example).
Regarding Claim 10,
Claim 10 is a method claim that corresponds to media claim 3 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding Claim 17,
Claim 17 is a device claim that is broader than media claim 3 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding Claim 4,
Gray as modified by Tunnell and Singh discloses the media of claim 1, in addition, Gray discloses that the programming code, when executed by the processor of the client device, further causes the processor to: generate a prompt requesting re-authorization of the client device (Exemplary Citations: for example, Column 2, line 21 to Column 3, line 17; Column 4, lines 34-51; Column 7, line 47 to Column 8, line 49; Column 9, line 52 to Column 10, line 21; Column 10, line 36 to Column 11, line 11; Column 12, line 26 to Column 13, line 3, and associated figures; any prompt regarding authorization of the device in any fashion, such as by asking for user credentials, session codes, phone numbers, or any indication that the device is authorized by anyone in any fashion, for example); and
Tunnel discloses that the programming code, when executed by the processor of the client device, further causes the processor to: generate a prompt requesting re-authorization of the client device (Exemplary Citations: for example, Paragraphs 44-56, 59, 62, 76, 78, 96-101, 105-108, 121, 122, 158, 159, 163-167, 171, 176, 189, 192, 200, 202, 203, and associated figures; determining if device is authorized to release data, such as by asking for an acknowledgement, or an explicit user authentication, for example).
Regarding Claim 11,
Claim 11 is a method claim that corresponds to media claim 4 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding Claim 5,
Gray as modified by Tunnell and Singh discloses the media of claim 1, in addition, Tunnell discloses that the prompt within the displayed customer service web content includes an indication to engage the contactless card with the client device (Exemplary Citations: for example, Paragraphs 44-56, 59, 62, 78, 96-101, 105-108, 121, 122, 158, 159, 163-165, 171, 176, 189, 192, 203, and associated figures).
Regarding Claim 12,
Claim 12 is a method claim that corresponds to media claim 5 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding Claim 18,
Claim 18 is a device claim that is broader than media claim 5 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding Claim 21,
Gray as modified by Tunnell, Singh, and Breekel discloses the media of claim 1, in addition, Gray discloses prior to receiving the customer service content (Exemplary Citations: for example, Column 2, lines 21-58; Column 4, line 12 to Column 5, line 2; Column 9, line 51 to Column 10, line 35; Column 11, line 47 to Column 12, line 41; and associated figures; before getting content described above, for example):
Receive a second set of authentication information (Exemplary Citations: for example, Column 2, lines 21-58; Column 4, line 12 to Column 5, line 2; Column 7, line 47 to Column 8, line 49; Column 9, line 51 to Column 10, line 35; Column 11, line 47 to Column 12, line 41; and associated figures; receive and authenticate credentials, username, password, etc., for example); and
Authenticate the second set of authentication information (Exemplary Citations: for example, Column 2, lines 21-58; Column 4, line 12 to Column 5, line 2; Column 7, line 47 to Column 8, line 49; Column 9, line 51 to Column 10, line 35; Column 11, line 47 to Column 12, line 41; and associated figures).
Regarding Claim 22,
Claim 22 is a method claim that corresponds to medium claim 21 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding Claim 23,
Claim 23 is a device claim that is broader than medium claim 21 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding Claim 24,
Gray as modified by Tunnell, Singh, and Breekel discloses the media of claim 1, in addition, Gray discloses that the second set of authentication information includes at least one of a group of credentials, biometric information, and a key (Exemplary Citations: for example, Column 2, lines 21-58; Column 4, line 12 to Column 5, line 2; Column 7, line 47 to Column 8, line 49; Column 9, line 51 to Column 10, line 35; Column 11, line 47 to Column 12, line 41; and associated figures).
Regarding Claim 25,
Claim 25 is a method claim that corresponds to medium claim 24 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding Claim 26,
Claim 26 is a device claim that is broader than medium claim 24 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jeffrey D Popham whose telephone number is (571)272-7215. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 9:00-5:30.
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, Jeffrey Nickerson can be reached at (469) 295-9235. 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.
/Jeffrey D. Popham/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2432
Prosecution Insights