Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments/Amendments
Regarding rejection of the claims under 35 USC 103 over Carapelli ‘190 in view of Wu and England, Applicant submits that Carapelli ‘190 does not disclose a separate PIN pad device and media processor in communication with each other and a display in communication with said media processor. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Fig. 3b of Carapelli ‘190 discloses a controller 206 operating a PIN pad 212, therefore disclosing the claimed PIN pad device. Fig. 3b further discloses a controller 204 comprising a display controller 322 in communication with a display 208, therefore disclosing the claimed media processor separate from the PIN pad device and in communication with a display. Furthermore, Applicant’s arguments relating to paragraph 0079 are directed to a separate embodiment (Fig. 7) disclosed by Carapelli ‘190 that is not relied upon for this rejection. Regardless, as display controller 322 is comprised within controller 204, the controller 204 necessarily still receives all prompt and video data from the PIN pad device, thus providing a “functionally interposed” media processor between the PIN pad device and display.
Applicant further submits that Carapelli ‘190 does not disclose a non-secure communication cable providing communications between the PIN pad device and media processor while also supplying DC power to the PIN pad. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. It is well-known in the art that standard USB cables are capable of providing both data and power at the same time (“USB has always included some capability of providing power to peripheral devices...”, see NPL teaching reference “USB hardware”). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the flexible circuit assembly 602 disclosed by paragraph 0081 of Carapelli ‘190, which may include a USB cable, would necessarily supply DC power in addition to providing communications between the media processor and PIN pad device.
Applicant further submits that Fig. 8 of Carapelli ‘190 teaches against the claims by only disclosing controller 206. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Paragraph 0083 explicitly discloses, “...controller 204 is omitted in the example illustrated in FIG. 8, but it is to be appreciated that this controller can be present to receive video data from controller 206 for presenting on display 208, for example (e.g., as a display controller 322).” Therefore, Carapelli ‘190 in combination with Wu and England discloses all limitations of at least claim 1 and the rejection is maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-3 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carapelli (US 2013/0103190 "Carapelli '190") in view of Wu et al. (US 2017/0103244 “Wu”) and further in view of England et al. (US 2003/0140241 “England”).
Regarding claim 1, Carapelli ‘190 discloses: A fuel dispenser payment system comprising:
a PIN pad device (“controller 206”) executing a secure payment application and securely storing information corresponding to payment display data (Fig. 2, Fig. 3b, 0041, 0043-0044, 0053-0054);
a media processor ("controller 204") having an associated memory, said media processor being separate from but in communication with said PIN pad device, said payment display data being securely stored so as to be accessible by said media processor (Fig. 2, Fig. 3b, 0040, 0043-0044, 0053-0054, 0066);
a non-secure communication cable1 providing communications between the PIN pad device and the media processor while also supplying DC power to the PIN pad (Fig. 8, 0081-0083);
a display in communication with said media processor (Fig. 2, Fig. 3b, 0040);
and wherein the media processor functionally interposes the PIN pad and the display and is operative to: determine that the PIN pad device has entered a secure payment mode (“secure state” Fig. 2, Fig. 3b, 0053-0054, 0060);
and cause the specific decrypted payment display data to be rendered by the display and (0053-0054, 0060);
said media processor being further operative in a second mode (“non-secure state”) in which other data not based on said information is caused by said media processor to be rendered on the display (Fig. 3b, 0053-0054, 0057, 0060).
Carapelli ‘190 does not disclose: storing a plurality of electronic tokens corresponding to display data; and
...receive...electronic tokens from the PIN pad device;
...retrieve...display data corresponding to the received electronic tokens;
However, in the same field of endeavor, Wu discloses: storing a plurality of electronic tokens2 (“index numbers”) corresponding to display data (Fig. 1-2, 0033, 0037-0038); and
...receive...electronic tokens from the PIN pad device (Fig. 1-2, 0034-0038);
...retrieve...display data corresponding to the received electronic tokens (Fig. 1-2, 0034-0038);
and cause the specific...display data to be rendered by the display (Fig. 1-2, 0034-0038).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify claim 1 disclosed by Carapelli ‘190 by including storing and receiving a plurality of electronic tokens corresponding to display data as disclosed by Wu. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to reduce the amount of data transmitted between devices (Wu 0074).
Carapelli ‘190 in view of Wu does not disclose: in the secure payment mode, receive cryptographically unique electronic tokens from the PIN pad device;
in response to determining that the PIN pad device is in the secure payment mode, retrieve and decrypt encrypted display data corresponding to the received electronic tokens.
However, in the same field of endeavor, England discloses: in the secure payment mode, receive cryptographically unique electronic tokens (“index keys”) from the PIN pad device (Fig. 3a, 0063, 0111, 0130);
in response to determining that the PIN pad device is in the secure payment mode, retrieve and decrypt encrypted display data corresponding to the received electronic tokens (Fig. 3a, 0063, 0105-0107, 0111, 0114-0115).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify claim 1 disclosed by Carapelli ‘190 in view of Wu by including receiving cryptographically unique electronic tokens and retrieving and decrypting corresponding display data as disclosed by England. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to improve security by allowing encryption of individual graphic elements with different encryption keys (England 0063).
Regarding claim 2, Carapelli ‘190 in view of Wu and further in view of England discloses all limitations of claim 1. Carapelli ‘190 further discloses: wherein said PIN pad device communicates with one of an enhanced dispenser hub or a point of sale (POS) system (0037, 0039).
Regarding claim 3, Carapelli ‘190 in view of Wu and further in view of England discloses all limitations of claim 2. Wu further discloses: wherein said electronic tokens are independent of network keys and a user's personal identification number (PIN) (0073-0075).
Regarding claim 6, Carapelli ‘190 in view of Wu and further in view of England discloses all limitations of claim 1. Carapelli ‘190 further discloses: wherein display of nonpayment information is blocked during a payment mode in which the tokens are received by the media processor (0053-0054, 0057, 0060).
Claims 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carapelli ‘190 in view of Wu and England as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Carapelli et al. (US 2014/0089174 "Carapelli '174").
Regarding claim 7, Carapelli ‘190 in view of Wu and England discloses all limitations of claim 4.
Carapelli ‘190 in view of Wu and England does not disclose: wherein the media processor is implemented on one core of a multi-core processor having at least two processor cores on a single semiconductor die.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Carapelli ‘174 discloses: wherein the media processor is implemented on one core of a multi-core processor having at least two processor cores on a single semiconductor die (0023, 0075-0076).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify claim 7 disclosed by Carapelli ‘190 in view of Wu and England by including implementing the media processor on one core of a multi-core processor as disclosed by Carapelli ‘174. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification as a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results (KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007)).
Regarding claim 8, Carapelli ‘190 in view of Wu, England, and Carapelli ‘174 discloses all limitations of claim 7. Carapelli ‘174 further discloses: wherein said one core operates separately and asynchronously from at least one other core on said multi-core processor (0023, 0075-0076).
Regarding claim 9, Carapelli ‘190 in view of Wu, England, and Carapelli ‘174 discloses all limitations of claim 8. Carapelli ‘174 further discloses: wherein said multi-core processor has at least four of said processor cores (0023, 0075-0076).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Malliah et al. (US 20170124557) generally discloses a server storing a token database of multi-layer tokens, receiving an authorization message identifying one of the tokens, decrypting a first layer of the identified token, extracting from the decrypted layer a pointer to a secondary database storing predetermined data value(s) corresponding to said pointer(s), and excising the corresponding data value(s) using the extracted pointer.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAYLOR RAK whose telephone number is (571)270-1575. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 11:00-7:00 EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, John W Hayes can be reached on (571)-272-6708. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/T.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3697
/JOHN W HAYES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3697
1 The Examiner notes that paragraph 0063 of the instant specification (0073 of the published specification) discloses that said “non-secure communication cable” may be a single USB cable.
2 Under broadest reasonable interpretation and in accordance with the specification (e.g. para 0061), “electronic tokens” are interpreted to merely be data/information, such as indexes or pointers, corresponding to and used to retrieve stored display data. Therefore, the prior art must merely disclose storing and transmitting information corresponding to display data that may be used to retrieve said display data from storage.