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 .
DETAILED ACTION
The following Final office action is in response to applicant’s all claims-Amendments/Remarks filed on 08/19/2025.
Priority Date: PCT/(US 2021/06097)(11/29/2021)>Prov(12/01/2020)
Claim Status:
All Amended claims:1-20
Pending claims: 1-20
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
[withdrawn for amendments]
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
In particular, claims are directed to a judicial exception (Abstract idea) without significantly more.
When considering subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. 101, (Step-1) it must be determined whether the claim is directed to one of the four statutory categories of invention, i.e., process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. (Step-2A) If the claim does fall within one of the statutory categories, it must then be determined whether the claim is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., law of nature, natural phenomenon, and abstract idea), and if so, (Step-2B) it must additionally be determined whether the claim is a patent-eligible application of the exception. If an abstract idea is present in the claim, any element or combination of elements in the claim must be sufficient to ensure that the claim amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
Examples of abstract ideas grouping include: (a) Mental processes; (b) Certain methods of organizing human activities [ i. Fundamental Economic Practice; ii. Commercial or Legal Interaction; iii. Managing Personal behavior or Relations between People]; and (c) Mathematical relationships/formulas. Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank International, et al., 573 U.S. (2014).
Analysis is based on the Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance (2019 PEG) — see MPEP 2106.04(II) and 2106.04(d).
[Step-1] The claims are directed to a method/system, which are a statutory category of invention.
Claim 13 (exemplary) recites a series of steps for a computer-implemented method for unified cross-platform account access management and offline transaction processing.
[Step-2A]-Prong 1:The computer-implemented method claim 13 is then analyzed to determine whether it is directed to a judicial exception:
The method claim 13 recites the limitations of:
maintaining, at a SMUP server, association records in an database storage that map external platform account identity for each user to a user identity, and storing persistent authentication data linked to the user identity;
receiving, from client software executed on a first client device, user identification credentials for an initial authentication, and upon successful authentication, recording authentication status in association with the user identity;
validating, by server software executed on the SMUP server, subsequent access requests from the first client device and/or from a second client device against the maintained association records and the stored authentication data, without requiring separate authentications for each of the user accounts across different platforms; and
PNG
media_image1.png
7
5
media_image1.png
Greyscale
in response to a client device operating offline,
binding transaction data generated during the offline period to the user identity, and upon network reconnection, validating the transaction data against the stored authentication data and the maintained association records.
The claimed method/system simply describes series of steps for a computer-implemented method for unified cross-platform account access management and offline transaction processing.
These limitations, as drafted, are processes that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitations via human commercial or business or transactional activities/interactions, but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting one or more servers/processors, devices and computer network nothing in the claim precludes the limitations from practically being performed by organizing human business activity. For example, without the structure elements language, the claim encompasses the activities that can be performed manually between the users and a third party. These limitations are directed to an abstract idea because they are business interaction/sale activity that falls within the enumerated group of “certain methods of organizing human activity” in the 2019 PEG.
[Step-2A]-Prong 2:
Next, the claim is analyzed to determine if it is integrated into a practical application. The claim recites additional limitation of using one or more servers/processors, devices and computer network to perform the steps. The processor in the steps is recited at a high level of generality, i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function of processing data. This generic processor limitation is no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer component. Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to the abstract idea.
[Step-2B]
Next, the claim is analyzed to determine if there are additional claim limitations that individually, or as an ordered combination, ensure that the claim amounts to significantly more than the abstract ideas (whether claim provides inventive concept).
As discussed above, the recitation of the claimed limitations amounts to mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a processor (using the processor as a tool to implement the abstract idea). Taking the additional elements individually and in combination, the processor/servers at each step of the process performs purely generic computer functions. As such, there is no inventive concept sufficient to transform the claimed subject matter into a patent-eligible application. The same analysis applies here, i.e., mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application at or provide an inventive concept.
Viewing the limitations as an ordered combination does not add anything further than looking at the limitations individually. When viewed either individually, or as an ordered combination, the additional limitations do not amount to a claim as a whole that is significantly more than the abstract idea itself. Therefore, the claim does not amount to significantly more than the recited abstract idea, and the claim is not patent eligible. The analysis above applies to all statutory categories of invention including independent claim 1.
Furthermore, the dependent claims 2-12, and 16-20 do not resolve the issues raised in the independent claims. The dependent claims 2-12, and 14-20 are directed towards:
Using in claims (2-12, 14-15), the SMUP server is further configured to support offline transaction processing by binding an offline transaction requests to the user identity, and upon reconnection the SMUP server validates the transaction data against the stored authentication data and the maintained association records without requiring a repeated authentication; receive successful OAUTH verifications from at least two different social media servers, and to associate verification status and the user accounts with the user identity stored in the database storage; the server-side software and the client-side software are further support an independent web function between client devices; the independent web function is supported by a data structure that stores a most recent snapshot of current user information for a disconnected client device. and wherein all information and results generated during the independent web function are locally stored and synchronized with the server and platforms when the communication network is restored; And
In claims (16-20), the data structure stores a most recent snapshot of current information of the user who is not connected to the communication network; wherein the financial account comprises a bank account, debit, credit card, or digital currency; wherein the money balance transfer can be made completed offline on a POS machine, PC, mobile, or smart device using the other data structure; offline transaction processing further comprises recording transaction data locally in association with the user identity, and upon reconnection the SMUP server verifies the recorded transaction data against the stored authentication data and the association records without requiring a repeated authentication.
These limitations are also part of the abstract idea identified in claim 13, and are similarly rejected under same rationale.
Accordingly, the dependent claims 2-12, and 14-20 are rejected as ineligible for patenting under 35 U.S.C. 101 based upon the same analysis.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Srivastava et al (US 2014/0019352 A1) in view of Kannan et al (US 2021/0105518 A1), and Hecht et al ( US 2024/0320718 A1).
Ref claim 1 (Amended), Srivastava discloses a distributed computer-implemented system for enabling unified cross-platform account access, comprising:
a SMUP server providing a network-based service and configured to maintain authorization and persistent associations among a plurality of user accounts, including multiple accounts of a same user across different platforms and accounts of different users across different platforms, the associations including at least one account on a social media platform and at least one account maintained with the SMUP server, for each user respectively (para [0100]; via the WIP [Wallet-In-Proxy] consumer transaction integrated with a universal payment platform [social media universal payment-SMUP] with users of more payment accounts/the consumer create an e-wallet service account and enroll with the e-wallet (e.g. Visa V.me wallet etc.), via WIP. … to register a payment card (debit/credit, etc.) with the e-wallet via pop-up window…[0102]; via a mobile platform [FIGs. 4A-4I), a digital e-wallet, a smart/prepaid card linked user’s payment accounts…payment platforms…via cloud/server services and a number of varying client devices… [0115]; via the consumer configure leash parameters 205 with WIP server 220 …[0124]; via the leash parameters, when consumer 202 shops with a merchant 250…and proceed to pay a POS terminal at a merchant store…[0138]; via a consumer register a “wallet” 203 with the WIP server 220…Ex. A social media platform 250b, a merchant shopping website 250c, …to pay for a transaction via the consumer’s WIP…);
the SMUP server further comprising a database storage maintaining association records that map external platform account identity for each user to a user identity, and storing persistent authentication data linked to the user identity (para [0137-138]; FIG. 2B…[0139]; via the consumer 202 operate a personal device such as desktop, a laptop, a PDA, a smart phone to access a WIP 220/ a merchant shopping website…a social media platform 111…submit his WIP ID, password. An item to purchase, user credentials 247 or the like to the WIP merchant 250… [0140]; via to engage WIP payment and consumer credentials…a registered user record/not limited to a checking account, a credit card account…and or the like./…Upon confirmation of the payment, the WIP may generate and store the transaction record 253 at a database 219…);
[[server software executed on the SMUP server, the server software being configured to enforce access control to the network-based service by validating access requests against the association records and the stored authentication data;]]
a first client device and a second client device connected to the SMUP server through a communication network; and client software executed on the first client device and the second client device, the client software being configured to transmit user identification credentials to the SMUP server for an initial authentication and thereafter interact with the SMUP server using the maintained association records such that, once the same user is authenticated, subsequent access requests from the first and/or second client devices are validated against the maintained association records and the stored authentication data without requiring separate authentications for each of the user accounts across the different platforms (para [0102]; via a mobile platform [FIGs. 4A-4I), a digital e-wallet, a smart/prepaid card linked user’s payment accounts…payment platforms…via cloud/server services and a number of varying client devices… [0143]; via the WIP may be used in a variety of transactions, such as the eCommerce, social networks, money transfer/personal payments, mobile commerce, and/or the like… [0156]; via the user submit user credential to log into WIP 362…and request fund transfer …the WIP server may then store a transaction record 389….[0444]; via the user accounts data…issuer server…may determine whether the user has a sufficient balance remaining in the account…).
Srivastava does not explicitly disclose the step of: server software executed on the SMUP server, the server software being configured to enforce access control to the network-based service by validating access requests against the association records and the stored authentication data.
However Kannan discloses the step of: server software executed on the SMUP server, the server software being configured to enforce access control to the network-based service by validating access requests against the association records and the stored authentication data (para [0041], FIG. 2; via distributed computing environment 200/computer servers 202/client computing devices 206…[0042]; Client devices 206/…server software applications/Ex. web-based or cloud based to support access or interaction with client devices 206 …[0044]; FIG.2; server system 101/server 202 and end point devices 206…web servers and/or authentication servers…[0045]; Security and integration components 208 implement security features…storage, such as authentication endpoints…[WS] based integration/data…[0050], FIG.3; EX. a social network service page or a web portal…[0086]; an authenticaion storage 412 include authentication data…).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the features mentioned by Srivastava to include the disclosures as taught by Kannan to facilitate enforce access control for secure enrollment process and validation.
Ref claim 2 (Amended), Srivastava discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the SMUP server is further configured to support offline transaction processing by binding offline transaction requests to the user identity, such that a client device operating without continuous network connectivity records transaction data associated with the user identity, and upon reconnection the SMUP server validates the transaction data against the stored authentication data and the maintained association records without requiring a repeated authentication (para [0156]; via the user submit user credential to log into WIP 362…and request fund transfer …the WIP server may then store a transaction record 389….).
Ref claim 3 (Amended), Srivastava does not explicitly disclose the steps of: the system of claim 1, wherein the SMUP server is further configured to receive successful OAUTH verifications from at least two different social media servers, and to associate verification status and the user accounts with the user identity stored in the database storage,
However, Hecht discloses the step of: the system of claim 1, wherein the SMUP server is further configured to receive successful OAUTH verifications from at least two different social media servers, and to associate verification status and the user accounts with the user identity stored in the database storage (para [0055-56], FIG. 2A; via a high level centralized biller Exchange computing system 210...through a secure enrollment process [for Ex., using the OAuth authorization protocol…]…the secure enrollment process may require multi-factor authorization or other identification/verification process…).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the features mentioned by Srivastava to include the disclosures as taught by Hecht to facilitate OAUTH authorization protocol for secure enrollment process for authentication.
Ref claim 4 (Amended), Srivastava discloses the system of claim 3, wherein the server software and the client software are further configured to cooperatively support an independent web function between the first client device and the second client device when one of the client devices is temporarily disconnected from the communication network (para [0102]; via a mobile platform [FIGs. 4A-4I), e-wallet, a smart/prepaid card linked user’s payment accounts…payment platforms…via cloud/server services… [0115]; via the consumer configure leash parameters 205 with WIP server 220 …).
Ref claim 5 (Amended), Srivastava discloses the system of claim 4, wherein the independent web function is supported by a data structure that stores a most recent snapshot of current user information for a disconnected client device, and wherein all information and results generated during the independent web function are locally stored and synchronized with the SMUP server and platforms when the communication network is restored (para [0102]; via a mobile platform [FIGs. 4A-4I), e-wallet, a smart/prepaid card linked user’s payment accounts…payment platforms…via cloud/server services… [0115]; via the consumer configure leash parameters 205 with WIP server 220 …).
Ref claim 6 (Amended), Srivastava discloses the system of claim 4 [[5]], wherein the independent web function is a financial transaction and the corresponding user account is a financial account (para [0140]; via to engage WIP payment and consumer credentials…a registered user record/not limited to a checking account, a credit card account…and or the like…).
Ref claim 7 (Amended), Srivastava discloses the system of claim 6 [[5]] , wherein the financial account comprises a bank account, debit card, credit card, or digital currency account, and wherein the financial transaction comprises a payment, money transfer, or currency exchange (para [0124]; via the leash parameters, when consumer 202 shops with a merchant 250…and proceed to pay a POS terminal at a merchant store…).
Ref claim 8 (Amended), Srivastava discloses the system of claim 6 [[1]], wherein the money balance transfer is completed offline on a point-of-sale (POS) machine, personal computer, mobile device, or smart device using additional data structure (para [0124]; via the leash parameters, when consumer 202 shops with a merchant 250…and proceed to pay a POS terminal at a merchant store…).
Ref claim 9 (Amended), Srivastava discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the access request is generated from a webpage form, a QR code, a bar code, or a hyperlink (para [0196[; via the virtual wallet application a shopping assistant 704, ex. a user may walk into a physical store of a merchant …the user device may utilize NFC, QR code, scan, etc. ….).
Ref claim 10 (Amended), Srivastava discloses the system of claim 1, wherein at least one of the first and second client devices comprises a merchant, store, institution, restaurant, or other business entity (para [0124]; via the leash parameters, when consumer 202 shops with a merchant 250…and proceed to pay a POS terminal at a merchant store…).
Ref claim 11 (Amended), Srivastava discloses the system of claim 1, wherein at least one of the authentications includes inputting and verifying login credentials or biometric data, the login credentials including at least one of: account username, password, personal identification number (PIN), security question, or verification code; and the biometric data including at least one of: facial recognition, retina scan, iris recognition, fingerprint scanning, finger vein identification, or voice identification (para [0172]; via the consumer may proceed to submit 437d the bond request, and the cardholder…selection of “Confirmation” button…[e.g., PIN code, user name and password, biometrics, voice identification…).
Ref claim 12 (Amended), Srivastava discloses the system of claim 2, wherein the offline transaction processing further comprises recording transaction data locally in association with the user identity, and upon reconnection the SMUP server verifies the recorded transaction data against the stored authentication data and the association records without requiring a repeated authentication (para [0172]; via the consumer may proceed to submit 437d the bond request, and the cardholder…selection of “Confirmation” button…[e.g., PIN code, user name and password, biometrics, voice identification…).
Ref claim 13 (Amended), Srivastava discloses a computer-implemented method for unified cross-platform account access management and offline transaction processing, the method comprising:
maintaining, at a SMUP server, association records in an database storage that map external platform account identity for each user to a user identity, and storing persistent authentication data linked to the user identity (para [0102]; via a mobile platform [FIGs. 4A-4I), a digital e-wallet, a smart/prepaid card linked user’s payment accounts…payment platforms…via cloud/server services and a number of varying client devices… [0143]; via the WIP may be used in a variety of transactions, such as the eCommerce, social networks, money transfer/personal payments, mobile commerce, and/or the like… [0156]; via the user submit user credential to log into WIP 362…and request fund transfer …the WIP server may then store a transaction record 389….[0444]; via the user accounts data…issuer server…may determine whether the user has a sufficient balance remaining in the account…);
receiving, from client software executed on a first client device, user identification credentials for an initial authentication, and upon successful authentication, recording authentication status in association with the user identity (para [0137-138]; FIG. 2B…[0139]; via the consumer 202 operate a personal device such as desktop, a laptop, a PDA, a smart phone to access a WIP 220/ a merchant shopping website…a social media platform 111…submit his WIP ID, password. An item to purchase, user credentials 247 or the like to the WIP merchant 250… [0140]; via to engage WIP payment and consumer credentials…a registered user record/not limited to a checking account, a credit card account…and or the like./…Upon confirmation of the payment, the WIP may generate and store the transaction record 253 at a database 219…);
[[validating, by server software executed on the SMUP server, subsequent access requests from the first client device and/or from a second client device against the maintained association records and the stored authentication data, without requiring separate authentications for each of the user accounts across different platforms]]; and
in response to a client device operating offline, binding transaction data generated during the offline period to the user identity, and upon network reconnection, validating the transaction data against the stored authentication data and the maintained association records (para [0102]; via a mobile platform [FIGs. 4A-4I), a digital e-wallet, a smart/prepaid card linked user’s payment accounts…payment platforms…via cloud/server services and a number of varying client devices… [0143]; via the WIP may be used in a variety of transactions, such as the eCommerce, social networks, money transfer/personal payments, mobile commerce, and/or the like… [0156]; via the user submit user credential to log into WIP 362…and request fund transfer …the WIP server may then store a transaction record 389….[0444]; via the user accounts data…issuer server…may determine whether the user has a sufficient balance remaining in the account…).
Srivastava does not explicitly disclose the step of: validating, by server software executed on the SMUP server, subsequent access requests from the first client device and/or from a second client device against the maintained association records and the stored authentication data, without requiring separate authentications for each of the user accounts across different platforms.
However Kannan discloses the step of: validating, by server software executed on the SMUP server, subsequent access requests from the first client device and/or from a second client device against the maintained association records and the stored authentication data, without requiring separate authentications for each of the user accounts across different platforms (para [0041], FIG. 2; via distributed computing environment 200/computer servers 202/client computing devices 206…[0042]; Client devices 206/…server software applications/Ex. web-based or cloud based to support access or interaction with client devices 206 …[0044]; FIG.2; server system 101/server 202 and end point devices 206…web servers and/or authentication servers…[0045]; Security and integration components 208 implement security features…storage, such as authentication endpoints…[WS] based integration/data…[0050], FIG.3; EX. a social network service page or a web portal…[0086]; an authenticaion storage 412 include authentication data…).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the features mentioned by Srivastava to include the disclosures as taught by Kannan to facilitate enforce access control for secure enrollment process and validation.
Ref claim 14 (Amended), Srivastava does not explicitly disclose the steps of: the method of claim 13, wherein at least two different external platform accounts are registered on different third-party social media servers; and wherein the validation of the server-side software receives a first OAUTH verification of a first platform account from a first third-party social media server, and a second OAUTH verification of a second platform account from a second third-party social media server.
However, Hecht discloses the step of: the method of claim 13, wherein at least two different external platform accounts are registered on different third-party social media servers; and wherein the validation of the server-side software receives a first OAUTH verification of a first platform account from a first third-party social media server, and a second OAUTH verification of a second platform account from a second third-party social media server (para [0055-56], FIG. 2A; via a high level centralized biller Exchange computing system 210...through a secure enrollment process [for Ex., using the OAuth authorization protocol…]…the secure enrollment process may require multi-factor authorization or other identification/verification process…).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the features mentioned by Srivastava to include the disclosures as taught by Hecht to facilitate OAUTH authorization protocol for secure enrollment process for authentication.
Ref claim 15 (Amended), Srivastava discloses the method of claim 14, wherein the server software and the client software include a data structure configured to support execution of an independent web function between the first client device and the second client device when the first client device is disconnected from the communication network (para [0140]; via to engage WIP payment and consumer credentials…a registered user record/not limited to a checking account, a credit card account…and or the like./…Upon confirmation of the payment, the WIP may generate and store the transaction record 253 at a database 219…).
Ref claim 16 (Amended), Srivastava discloses method of claim 15, wherein the data structure stores a most recent snapshot of current information of the user who is not connected to the communication network; and wherein the independent web function is completed by locally storing information and results generated during the independent web function, and synchronizing stored information and results with the server, the third-party social media server, and/or the independent web function after communication network connection is restored (para [0140]; via to engage WIP payment and consumer credentials…a registered user record/not limited to a checking account, a credit card account…and or the like./…Upon confirmation of the payment, the WIP may generate and store the transaction record 253 at a database 219…).
Ref claim 17 (Amended), Srivastava discloses the method of claim 16, wherein the independent web function is a financial transaction and the corresponding user account is a financial account (para [0143]; via the WIP may be used in a variety of transactions, such as the eCommerce, social networks, money transfer/personal payments, mobile commerce, and/or the like…).
Ref claim 18 (Amended), Srivastava discloses the method of claim 17, wherein the financial account comprises a bank account, debit card, credit card, or digital currency account, and wherein the financial transaction comprises a payment, money transfer, or currency exchange; wherein at least one of the first and second client devices comprises a merchant, store, institution, restaurant, or other business entity (para [0143]; via the WIP may be used in a variety of transactions, such as the eCommerce, social networks, money transfer/personal payments, mobile commerce, and/or the like…).
Ref claim 19 (Amended), Srivastava discloses the method of claim 17, wherein the financial transaction comprises a money balance transfer completed offline on a point-of-sale machine, personal computer, mobile device, or smart device using additional data structure; wherein the offline transaction processing further comprises recording transaction data locally in association with the user identity, and upon reconnection the SMUP server verifies the recorded transaction data against the stored authentication data and the association records without requiring a repeated authentication (para [0124]; via the leash parameters, when consumer 202 shops with a merchant 250…and proceed to pay a POS terminal at a merchant store…).
Ref claim 20 (Amended), Srivastava discloses the method of claim 13 [[11]], wherein at least one of the authentications comprises inputting and verifying authentication information selected from the group consisting of:
login credentials, facial recognition, retinal scanning, iris recognition, fingerprint scanning, finger vein identification, and voice identification; and wherein the login credentials comprise an account username, password, personal identification number (PIN), security question, or verification code (para [0172]; via the consumer may proceed to submit 437d the bond request, and the cardholder…selection of “Confirmation” button…[e.g., PIN code, user name and password, biometrics, voice identification…).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 8/19/2025, have been fully considered and they are deemed to be non-persuasive:
Response to Applicant’s arguments with respect to the 35 USC 103 rejection is addressed in the above rejection.
Applicant's arguments filed with respect to the 35 USC 101 rejection of the previous action have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant refers to analogy of court cases such as EnFish & BASCOM.
Applicant argues further in substance that "The claims are Not Directed to an Abstract Idea and the claims Recite ‘Significantly More’ than abstract idea” and noted PEG-2019 [Step-2A-Prong One-Prong two & Step-2B].
In addition to 101 rejections Applicant noted about 103 rejections with applied prior arts.
In response:
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Updated claim analysis as a whole including amended features are provided above/again based on the latest Patent Eligibility Guidance [2019-PEG>Step 2A-Prong 1 & Prong 2, and Step-2B].
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (abstract idea) without significantly more. The rejection of the previous action was a direct result of the Supreme Court's decision in Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd v. CLS Bank I'ntl. 573 U.S. (2014); Under Alice.
Applicant’s REMARKS:
I. Response to the Claim Rejection under 35 USA § 112(b) as being indefinite.
“ In response to the Non-Final Office Action dated May 19, 2025, the Applicant respectfully traverses the rejections raised under 35 U.S.C. §§ 112 and 103. Each rejection is addressed in detail below. …;…;Therefore, the § 112(b) rejection should therefore be withdrawn.”
.
In Response: Claim Rejection-35 USC § 112(b) is withdraw for amendments.
II Response to 35 USC § 101 Non-statutory Subject Matter Rejections:
Applicant argued [Remarks pages 21-24] that, “The Examiner has rejected claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. §101 as allegedly directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Applicant amended all claims 1-20 and respectfully traverses this rejection.
1. The Claims Are Directed to a Practical System, Not an Abstract Idea. Now Newly amended independent claim 1 recites a "distributed computer-implemented system for enabling unified cross-platform account access"…;…;…;
2. The Claims Provide a Technical Solution to a Technical Problem. …;…;…; Such improvements are akin to the technical solutions found eligible in Enfish, …;…;
3. The Claims Recite "Significantly More" Than an Abstract Idea….;…;…; A per BASCOM v. …;…;
4. Integration into a Practical Application.
The claims integrate the alleged abstract idea into a practical application by providing a specific improvement in cross-platform authentication. Unlike the claims found ineligible in Alice v. CLS Bank, the present claims are tied to a particular technical architecture and do not merely implement a generic business practice on a computer. …;…; Especially, as to Claim 13, as currently amended, recites a computer-implemented method for unified cross-platform account management and offline transaction processing that requires specific technical operations of computer systems which cannot practically be performed mentally or manually by a human. … ;…;Applicant respectfully submits that Claim 13 satisfies the requirements of § 101. Same as Claim 1.
For these reasons, Applicant respectfully submits that the pending claims recite patent- eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. §101, and withdrawal of the §101 rejection is respectfully requested. ”
In Response to II: Examiner Disagrees:
The claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e. a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. In the instant case, the claim(s) as a whole, considering all claim elements both individually and in combination, do not amount to significantly more than an abstract idea.
Under Alice-Step (1): In the instant case, the claims are directed towards a method of building a distributed system for deriving financial information from social media financial accounts, which contains the steps of:
maintaining, at a SMUP server, association records in an database storage that map external platform account identity for each user to a user identity, and storing persistent authentication data linked to the user identity;
receiving, from client software executed on a first client device, user identification credentials for an initial authentication, and upon successful authentication, recording authentication status in association with the user identity;
validating, by server software executed on the SMUP server, subsequent access requests from the first client device and/or from a second client device against the maintained association records and the stored authentication data, without requiring separate authentications for each of the user accounts across different platforms; and
PNG
media_image1.png
7
5
media_image1.png
Greyscale
in response to a client device operating offline,
binding transaction data generated during the offline period to the user identity, and upon network reconnection, validating the transaction data against the stored authentication data and the maintained association records.
The claim recites a series of steps and, therefore, is a process.
Under Alice-Step (2A)-Prong 1: A method for deriving financial information from social media payment accounts is akin to the abstract idea subject matter grouping of: (Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity as ‘Fundamental economic practice to Managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people including, teaching, and following rules or instructions). As such, the claims include an abstract idea. The specific limitations of the invention are identified to encompass the abstract idea include:
(maintaining, at a SMUP …, association records…, and storing persistent authentication data linked to the user identity; receiving, from client software…, user identification credentials for an initial authentication, and … the user identity; validating, by … software executed on the SMUP …, subsequent access requests from the first client … user accounts across different platforms; and in response to a client … operating offline, binding transaction data generated during the offline period to the user identity, and upon network reconnection, validating the transaction data against the stored authentication data and the maintained association records.)
As stated above, this abstract idea falls into the subject matter grouping (b) of: (Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity as ‘Fundamental economic practice to Managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions’).
Under Alice-Step (2A)-Prong 2: When considered individually and in combination, the instant claims do not integrate the exception into a practical application because the steps of:
(maintaining, at a SMUP …, association records…, and storing persistent authentication data linked to the user identity; receiving, from client software…, user identification credentials for an initial authentication, and … the user identity; validating, by … software executed on the SMUP …, subsequent access requests from the first client … user accounts across different platforms; and in response to a client … operating offline, binding transaction data generated during the offline period to the user identity, and upon network reconnection, validating the transaction data against the stored authentication data and the maintained association records.)
do not apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limitation on the judicial exception (i.e. the abstract idea).
The instant recited claims including additional elements (i.e. “(maintaining, at a SMUP …, identity; receiving, from client software … the user identity; validating, by … software executed on the SMUP …, subsequent access requests from the first client … … operating offline, binding transaction data generated during the offline…upon network reconnection, validating …the maintained association records.)
do not improve the functioning of the computer or improve another technology or technical field nor do they recite meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The limitations merely use a generic computing technology (Specification [0042-43/00106]: servers/processors, memory, instructions, storage medium, and electrical communication) as tools to perform an abstract idea or merely add insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception. (MPEP 2106.05 (f) (g)). Therefore, the claims are directed to an abstract idea.
Under Alice-Step (2B): Additionally, the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements (Claims: e.g., server/ processor, instructions, memory, electrical communication, and storage medium) amount to no more than generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or merely using generic components as tool to perform an abstract idea.
In conclusion, merely “linking/applying” the exception using generic computer components does not constitute ‘significantly more’ than the abstract idea. (MPEP 2106.05 (f) (h)). Therefore, the claims are not patent eligible under 35 USC 101.
In support of “Mental Process ”or “Method of organizing Human activity”: It is to be noted that “the claimed invention is similar to Electric Power Group, LLC v. Alstom S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1354, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1742 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (mental processes: “a claim to "collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis," where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind ). MPEP 2106.04(a)(2), 2106.05(a)(g)(h)”
However, a generic recitation of a computer processor performing its generic computer functions does not make the claims less abstract. Examiner notes that the instant claims provide a generically computer-implemented solution to a business-related or economic problem. The focus of the claimed invention in the present is not on an improvement in computers as tools, but on certain independently abstract ideas that use computers as tools. The claims here are not directed to a specific improvement to computer functionality nor an inventive solution to any computer specific problem. Also, limiting the use of an abstract idea “‘to a particular technological environment’ does not confer patent eligibility as this cannot be considered an improvement to computer or technology and so cannot be “significantly more.”
In response to the Enfish argument, the claims here are unlike the claims in Enfish. In Enfish, the claims at issue focused not on asserted advances in uses to which existing computer capabilities could be put, but on a specific improvement-a particular database technique-in how computers could carry out one of their basic functions of storage and retrieval of data. In Enfish v. Microsoft, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decision… that “the self-referential table recited in the claims on appeal is a specific type of data structure designed to improve the way a computer stores and retrieves data in memory” which is “directed to a specific implementation of a solution to a problem in the software arts.” See also details in re TLI Communication LLC.
However, Applicant’s citation of BASCOM is non-persuasive because the claims at issue in BASCOM are readily distinguishable over the instant claims. In BASCOM v. AT&T: The claimed invention is able to provide individually customizable filtering at the remote ISP server by taking advantage of the technical capability of certain communication networks. …recite a system for filtering Internet content. The claimed filtering system is located on a remote ISP server that associates each network account with (1) one or more filtering schemes and (2) at least one set of filtering elements from a plurality of sets of filtering elements, thereby allowing individual network accounts to customize the filtering of Internet traffic associated with the account. For example, one filtering scheme could be “a word-screening type filtering scheme” and one set of filtering elements (from a plurality of sets) could be a “master list [] of disallowed words or phrases together with [an] individual [list of] words, phrases or rules.” Id. at 4:30-35
Response to 35 USC § 103 Obviousness Rejections:
Applicant argued [Remarks-pages 24-33] that, “The Examiner relies on combinations of prior art references (D1- Shrivastava, D2 - Katzin, D3 - Hecht) teaching token-based authentication and offline data storage. Applicant respectfully submits that the cited art does not render the claims obvious after the amendment of claims 1-20.
A. Distinction from Token-Based Systems. …;…;
B. Offline Transaction Binding. …;…;…;
C. Technical Advantages. …;…;….;
Claims 15-16 (independent web function): Supported by Spec. disclosure of snapshots and deferred synchronization.
Claims 17-19 (financial transactions): Extend the offline binding framework to specific transaction types, not disclosed in cited references. Claim 20 (biometric authentication options): Supported by Spec. and further underscores the flexibility of the UUI/OAuth binding system.”
In Response-Examiner disagrees with applicant’s assertions.
However, Srivastava et al discloses [obviously] all amended limitations in view of arts -Kannan[new] et al and Hecht et al:
By Srivastava via; (para [0100]; via the WIP consumer transaction integrated with a universal platform with users of more payment accounts/the consumer create an e-wallet service account and enroll with the e-wallet (e.g. Visa), via WIP…to register a payment card (debit/credit, etc.) with the e-wallet via pop-up window…[0102]; via a mobile platform [figs. 4A-4I), e-wallet, a smart/prepaid card linked user’s payment accounts…payment platforms…via cloud/server services… [0115]; via the consumer configure leash parameters 205 with WIP server 220 …[0124]; via the leash parameters, when consumer 202 shops with a merchant 250…and proceed to pay a POS terminal at a merchant store…[0138]; via a consumer register a “wallet”203 with the WIP server 220…Ex. A social media platform 250b, …to pay for a transaction via the consumer’s WIP… [0156]; via the user submit user credential to log into WIP 362…and request fund transfer …the WIP server may then store a transaction record 389….[0444]; via the user accounts data…issuer server…may determine whether the user has a sufficient balance remaining in the account…).
By Kannan discloses the step of: server software executed on the SMUP server, the server software being configured to enforce access control to the network-based service by validating access requests against the association records and the stored authentication data (para [0041], FIG. 2; via distributed computing environment 200/computer servers 202/client computing devices 206…[0042]; Client devices 206/…server software applications/Ex. web-based or cloud based to support access or interaction with client devices 206 …[0044]; FIG.2; server system 101/server 202 and end point devices 206…web servers and/or authentication servers…[0045]; Security and integration components 208 implement security features…storage, such as authentication endpoints…[WS] based integration/data…[0050], FIG.3; EX. a social network service page or a web portal…[0086]; an authenticaion storage 412 include authentication data…).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the features mentioned by Srivastava to include the disclosures as taught by Kannan to facilitate enforce access control for secure enrollment process and validation.
And
By Hecht discloses the step of: the system of claim 1, wherein the SMUP server is further configured to receive successful OAUTH verifications from at least two different social media servers, and to associate verification status and t