DETAILED ACTION
Acknowledgements
This Office Action is in response to Applicant’s correspondence filed on 2/17/26.
The Examiner notes that citations to United States Patent Application Publication paragraphs are formatted as [####], #### representing the paragraph number.
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.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-2, 4-16, 21-24 are currently pending.
Claims 1-2, 4-16, 21-24 are rejected as set forth below.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 2/17/16 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 103
Applicant' s arguments with respect to claims 1-2, 4-16, 21-24 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to any of the references being used in the current rejection.
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.
Claims 1-2, 4-16, 21-22, 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over United States Patent Application Publication No. 20150012434 to Aabye in view of United States Patent Application Publication No. 20080033880 to Fiebiger.
As per claims 1, 10, Aabye teaches:
A method for providing access control via an access server, comprising: configuring and performing a non-payment transaction comprising an access based on payment information provided for identification for the access: receiving an access initiation request for the access from an access terminal, the access initiation request including information about the card or the token; providing the access via the access terminal, in response to an access request, based on at least a retrieval of the mapping. ([0055]-[0056], [0058], “A user (not shown) may attempt to enter a restricted area in a transit location by interacting with the gate access device 102. In step S150, the user may use a portable consumer device 104 to interact with the reader 102(A) of the gate access device 102. For example, the user's portable consumer device 104 may interact with the gate access device 102 using a short range communication or short range wireless communication process, or a contact mode of communication (e.g., passing a magnetic stripe through a reader at the gate access device 102). Information such as an account number, cryptograms, and other identification information may pass from the portable consumer device 104 to the gate access device 102. The gate access device 102 may include a turnstile or gate device 102(C) to allow a patron to pass by the gate access device 102 into a restricted zone (e.g., where trains may be loaded with passengers) if the person is allowed to enter. It may alternatively prevent a patron from passing by the gate access device 102 if the patron has not been authorized to pass into the restricted zone. In some embodiments, if the account number (or cryptogram or other identifying information) that is received is neither on the black list or the white list, then additional authentication may be needed before allowing the user into the restricted area. The processor 102(B) in the gate access device 102 may generate a first authorization request message. In step S154, this message may be transmitted to the transit host computer 108 via the network interface 102(F), and to the payment processing network 110 in step S156. The server computer 410 in the payment processing network 110 may then validate the received account number, cryptogram, and any other authentication data from the portable consumer device 104 to authenticate it. Note that the first authorization request message does not request authorization for the transaction, but is solely used to authenticate the portable consumer device 104, or possibly the user. Consequently, the first authorization request message may not have an amount corresponding to the transaction being conducted (e.g., a zero dollar amount or no amount in the amount data field in the first authorization request message).”)
Aabye does not explicitly teach, but Fiebiger teaches:
receiving a payment card or token onboarding request for the access from a merchant server; initiating onboarding for the access based on the received payment card or token onboarding request; creating a mapping for the access and identification based on the information about the payment card or the token; ([0139], “FIG. 10 shows a process 1400 by which a customer who is mailed a PayPass card by an issuing bank can pre-register the PayPass card for use on a transit system, and link the card to a pre-funded transit account. At step 1441 of process 1400, the bank mails the PayPass card to the cardholder. At step 1442, the cardholder may elect to register the card with the transit system. Step 1445 may utilize a conventional address verification service (AVS) to check cardholder qualifications. The issuing bank may be notified if for three consecutive enrollment attempts the AVS check fails. However, the failing card may not be automatically hot listed. The issuing bank will have the necessary information and may choose to either hot list the card or allow the AVS checking parameters to be reset.”, The Examiner notes that creating an indication that a card passed the address verification service and is not put on a hot list is equivalent to creating a mapping.)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Fiebiger to the known invention of Aabye would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved invention. It would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate such card registration features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the invention to receive a payment card or token onboarding request for the access from a merchant server, initiate onboarding for the access based on the received payment card or token onboarding request, and create a mapping for the access and identification based on the information about the payment card or the token results in an improved invention because applying said technique ensures that a card is registered and onboarded by the access server before being commissioned for use, thus ensuring that access to the access terminal can be securely verified based on information provided in the registration process and therefore improving the overall security of the invention.
Regarding claim 10, Aabye teaches:
determining an availability of mapping information for the access and identification based on the information about the payment card or token; approving or denying the access via the access terminal based on at least the availability of the mapping information. ([0058]-[0063], “In embodiments of the invention, the server computer 410 may store keys and other data that will allow it to recreate cryptograms. Corresponding cryptograms may be received in authorization request messages and the received cryptograms verified against independently generated or previously stored cryptograms. If the received cryptogram and a generated or previously stored cryptogram match, then the payment device 104 may be deemed authentic.”)
As per claim 2, Aabye teaches:
wherein the information about the payment card or the token is associated with a consumer. ([0055])
As per claims 4, Aabye teaches:
validating the information about the payment card or the token. ([0058])
As per claims 5, Aabye teaches:
wherein validating the information about the payment card or the token comprises: generating an application status inquiry (ASI) message for the issuer based on the information about the payment card or the token, wherein the ASI message corresponds to an inquiry as to whether the payment card or the token is valid; transmitting the ASI message to the issuer via a payment network; and receiving a success message from the issuer via the payment network upon a successful matching based on the ASI message. ([0058]-[0063], “Any additional nodes would quickly forward a transaction authorization request to the payment processing network hub (e.g., Visa DEX) and expect an immediate authorization or decline from the issuer (e.g., through the Visa DEX).”)
As per claim 6, Aabye teaches:
providing a notification of a new access request to the merchant server upon receipt of the success message. ([0058]-[0063])
As per claim 7, Aabye teaches:
wherein the notification of the new access request includes a card identifier or a token identifier and a terminal identifier. ([0063])
Furthermore, Applicant attempts to further limit the method by describing characteristics of the notification. However, this is representative of non-functional descriptive material as characteristics of the notification does not result in a functional relationship with the method and therefore cannot be used to differentiate Applicant's invention from the prior art invention. See MPEP 2111.05; In re Gulack, 217 USPQ 401 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (“When descriptive material is not functionally related to the substrate, the descriptive material will not distinguish the invention from the prior art in terms of patentability.”). Specifically, the step of providing the notification is carried out the same way regardless of the type of data included in the notification: there is no evidence the characteristics of the notification changes the efficiency or the accuracy or any other characteristic of the providing. See Ex Parte Nehls, 88 USPQ2d 1883 (BPAI 2008) (“Here, the descriptive material (SEQ ID NOs) recited in the claims is not functional material like the data structures in Lowry. There is no evidence that SEQ ID NOs 9-1008 functionally affect the process of comparing a target sequence to a database by changing the efficiency or accuracy or any other characteristic of the comparison. Rather, the SEQ ID NOs are merely information being manipulated by a computer; the SEQ ID NOs are inputs used by a computer program that calculates the degree of similarity between a target sequence and each of the sequences in a database. The specific SEQ ID NOs recited in the claims do not affect how the method of the prior art is performed – the method is carried out the same way regardless of which specific sequences are included in the database (emphasis added).”)
As per claim 8, Fiebiger teaches:
wherein creating the mapping comprises: receiving a create access mapping request from the merchant server; and creating the mapping after receiving the create access mapping request ([0139])
As per claim 9, Fiebiger teaches:
wherein the create access mapping request includes a terminal identifier, a card identifier or a token identifier, and a duration. ([0139])
Furthermore, Applicant attempts to further limit the method by describing characteristics of the request. However, this is representative of non-functional descriptive material as characteristics of the request does not result in a functional relationship with the method and therefore cannot be used to differentiate Applicant's invention from the prior art invention. See MPEP 2111.05; In re Gulack, 217 USPQ 401 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (“When descriptive material is not functionally related to the substrate, the descriptive material will not distinguish the invention from the prior art in terms of patentability.”). Specifically, the step of receiving the request is carried out the same way regardless of the type of data included in the request: there is no evidence the characteristics of the request changes the efficiency or the accuracy or any other characteristic of the receiving. See Ex Parte Nehls, 88 USPQ2d 1883 (BPAI 2008) (“Here, the descriptive material (SEQ ID NOs) recited in the claims is not functional material like the data structures in Lowry. There is no evidence that SEQ ID NOs 9-1008 functionally affect the process of comparing a target sequence to a database by changing the efficiency or accuracy or any other characteristic of the comparison. Rather, the SEQ ID NOs are merely information being manipulated by a computer; the SEQ ID NOs are inputs used by a computer program that calculates the degree of similarity between a target sequence and each of the sequences in a database. The specific SEQ ID NOs recited in the claims do not affect how the method of the prior art is performed – the method is carried out the same way regardless of which specific sequences are included in the database (emphasis added).”)
As per claim 11, Aabye teaches:
wherein validating the information about the card or the token further comprises: retrieving the mapping information stored in a memory associated with the access server when the mapping information is available. ([0062])
As per claim 12, Aabye teaches:
wherein the memory associated with the access server comprises a memory of the access server or a storage location accessible by the access server. ([0062])
As per claim 13, Aabye teaches:
transmitting an application status inquiry (ASI) message to the issuer via a payment network, wherein the ASI message corresponds to an inquiry as to whether the card or the token is valid. ([0058]-[0063])
As per claim 14, Aabye teaches:
receiving the status inquiry result from the issuer via a payment network, wherein the status inquiry result comprises an application status inquiry (ASI) transmission result. ([0058]-[0063])
As per claim 15, Aabye teaches:
wherein the status inquiry result further indicates that the access via the access terminal can be approved. ([0058]-[0063])
As per claim 16, Aabye teaches:
approving or denying the access via the access terminal comprises denying access via the access terminal if the mapping information is not available. ([0058]-[0063])
As per claim 21, Fiebiger teaches:
storing the mapping in a memory associated with the access server, wherein the memory associated with the access server comprises a memory of the access server or a storage location accessible by the access server. ([0139])
As per claim 22, Aabye teaches:
wherein the retrieval of the mapping comprises a retrieval of the mapping from the memory associated with the access server. ([0062])
As per claim 24, Aabye teaches:
receiving the status inquiry result from the issuer via a payment network, wherein the status inquiry result comprises an application status inquiry (ASI) transmission result. ([0058]-[0063])
Claims 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over United States Patent Application Publication No. 20150012434 to Aabye in view of United States Patent Application Publication No. 20080033880 to Fiebiger, and further in view of United States Patent Application Publication No. 20200286061 to Wang.
As per claim 23, Aabye as modified does not explicitly teach, but Wang teaches:
wherein: the access terminal comprises a door lock; and providing the access via the access terminal comprises enabling door access via an unlocking of the door lock. ([0154]-[0155], “An access control policy of a door control card application may indicate that in a scenario of opening door under door control, the door control card application can be accessed only by a door control POS machine having a designated ID.”)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Wang to the known invention of Aabye as modified would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved invention. It would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate such access control features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the invention so the access terminal comprises a door lock and modifying the invention so providing the access via the access terminal comprises enabling door access via an unlocking of the door lock results in an improved invention because applying said technique allows the invention to be used in a wider scope, i.e. access to buildings via a door lock, thus improving the overall functionality of the invention.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
United States Patent Application Publication No. 20170161861 to Hong discloses a system and method for providing a transportation call service and fare payment service in response to a user's call request, including a first terminal configured to generate a transportation call request and a first settlement request for a first settlement of payment of a transportation fare; a transportation call server configured, in response to receiving the transportation call request from the first terminal, to generate a vehicle assignment message indicating the a vehicle has been assigned and to transmit the vehicle assignment message to the first terminal; and a payment agent server configured to process the payment of the transportation fare using an actual fare information and the first settlement request, wherein the actual fare information is generated according to a service operation of the assigned vehicle.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAY HUANG whose telephone number is (408)918-9799. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00a - 5:30p PT.
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, Anita Coupe can be reached on (571) 270-3614. 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.
/JAY HUANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619
Prosecution Insights