Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 17, 2026
Application No. 17/975,952

DIGITAL WALLET INTEGRATION FOR ONLINE SERVICES

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Oct 28, 2022
Examiner
SHERR, MARIA CRISTI OWEN
Art Unit
3697
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
NCR Atleos Corporation
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
27%
Grant Probability
At Risk
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 2m
Est. Remaining
41%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 27% of cases
27%
Career Allowance Rate
108 granted / 406 resolved
-25.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
6y 0m
Avg Prosecution
26 currently pending
Career history
440
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
26.1%
-13.9% vs TC avg
§103
43.1%
+3.1% vs TC avg
§102
9.4%
-30.6% vs TC avg
§112
21.0%
-19.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 406 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This Office Action is in response to the Applicant’s Amendment filed March 11, 2026. Claims 1-12 are pending in this case. Claims 13-20 are canceled pursuant to a Requirement for Restriction issued March 12, 2025. Claims 1, 8 and 11 are currently amended. Accordingly, claims 1-12 are under examination in this case. 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 March 11, 2026, has been entered. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1, as currently amended, have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Claim Objections Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “wherein the second digital wallet is managed by a gateway service, wherein the second digital wallet is managed by a gateway service”. (The phrase is repeated.) “wherein transferring the second amount comprises transferring the second amount from a financial account of the gateway service to the financial account of the FI, wherein transferring the second amount comprises transferring the second amount from a financial account of the gateway service to the financial account of the FI”. (The phrase is repeated.) 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 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Solis (US 2015/0178693) in view of Forzley et al (US 2017/0116608) and further in view of Law et al (US 2007/0125840), and Schnitt et al (US 2022/0292465). Regarding claim 1 – Solis discloses a method, comprising: integrating a payment by digital wallet option into a user interface of a fiat currency account management application (app); (par 19) receiving through the user interface a selection of the payment by digital wallet option from a user operating the app; (par 60) causing a transfer in a first amount from a first digital wallet of the user to a second digital wallet based on the receiving; (par 60-62, par 80) and transferring a second amount of a fiat currency to a financial account of a financial institution (FI) associated with the user as the payment on a user account with the FI. (par 60-62, par 80) Forzley discloses, as Solis does not specifically disclose, wherein the transfer occurs over a blockchain (BC). (par 44) A person of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect the payment method of SOLIS, in combination with the method of processing cryptocurrency disclosed by FORZLEY, to retain their respective properties and functions when performed in combination. See MPEP § 2143 Part II.A Ex.5 (discussing Sundance, Inc. v. DeMonte Fabricating Ltd., 89 USPQ2d 1535 (Fed. Cir. 2008)). Therefore, by the rationale outlined above, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the disclosure of SOLIS with the blockchain of FORZLEY to obtain the claimed invention. Law discloses, as Solis and Forsley do not, wherein the second digital wallet is managed by a gateway service, (par 95-96), and, wherein transferring the second amount comprises transferring the second amount from a financial account of the gateway service to the financial account of the FI. (par 114, 118, 142-143). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Solis with the gateway of Lawi, in order to achieve greater accuracy in transactions, that is, in order to better avoid sending payments to the wrong recipient. Schnitt teaches, as Solis does not teach specifically, verifying that the transfer appears on the BC as a pending transfer to the second digital wallet before initiating transfer of a second amount.(par 491-492). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the verification in Schnitt with Solis in order to avoid a repeated unsuccessful transactions. Regarding claim 2 – Solis discloses wherein receiving further includes receiving an account identifier for the user account and a wallet identifier for the first digital wallet from the app based on the selection.(par 56) Regarding claim 3 – Solis discloses wherein receiving further includes presenting within the user interface a code and instructing through the user interface the user to scan the code, wherein the code encoded with a wallet identifier for the second digital wallet. (par 81, 72) Regarding claim 4 – Solis discloses causing a wallet application on a user-operated device to generate and submit the transfer on the BC using the first amount from the first digital wallet and the wallet identifier for the second digital wallet when the code is scanned. (par 81, 72) Regarding claim 5 - Forzley discloses, as Solis does not specifically disclose, using the wallet identifier for the second digital wallet and confirming the transfer appears on the BC. (par 29, 44) It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the disclosure of SOLIS with the identifiers and blockchain of FORZLEY to obtain the claimed invention. Regarding claim 6 – Solis discloses wherein causing further includes presenting within the user interface a wallet identifier for the second digital wallet and instructing the user to initiate the payment from the first digital wallet to the second digital wallet on the blockchain using a wallet application on a user-operated device. (par 99-100) Regarding claim 7 – Solis discloses wherein presenting further includes identifying the transfer on the BC as a pending transfer to the second digital wallet and linking a wallet identifier for the first digital wallet appearing in the pending transfer to a user account identifier for the user account of the user. (par 48, 76) Regarding claim 8 - Forzley discloses, as Solis does not specifically disclose, transferring further includes converting the first amount of cryptocurrency to an equivalent amount in the fiat currency to identify the second amount of the fiat currency. (par 44) It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the disclosure of SOLIS with the multiple currencies of FORZLEY to obtain the claimed invention, along with greater user convenience. Regarding claim 9 – Solis discloses wherein transferring further includes transferring a user account identifier for the user account with the second amount. (par 99, 127, 12-16) Regarding claim 10 – Solis discloses wherein transferring further includes transferring the second amount from a financial account of a provider who provides the method. (par 12-16) Regarding claim 11 – Forzley discloses, as Solis does not specifically disclose, wherein transferring further includes exchanging the first amount of cryptocurrency within the second digital wallet to a third amount of a stable cryptocurrency over the BC. (par 44) It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the disclosure of SOLIS with the identifiers and blockchain of FORZLEY to obtain the claimed invention. Regarding claim 12 - Solis discloses processing the method as a cryptocurrency payment gateway service. (par 80) Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Zimmerman et al (US 2020/0005283) discloses a cryptocurrency payment and refund processing on a transaction terminal. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CRISTINA OWEN SHERR whose telephone number is (571)272-6711. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 - 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, John W Hayes can be reached at 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. /Cristina Owen Sherr/Examiner, Art Unit 3697 /JOHN W HAYES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3697
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 28, 2022
Application Filed
May 29, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103
Aug 28, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 11, 2025
Final Rejection mailed — §103
Feb 11, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 11, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 26, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
May 27, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12705606
Transfer Transaction Blockchain with Clawback Apparatuses, Processes and Systems
2y 11m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12632911
OFF-CHAIN ABSTRACTION MECHANISM FOR DISTRIBUTING NON-FUNGIBLE TOKENS IN AN EDUCATIONAL ENVIRONMENT
4y 1m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12619965
COMBINED SHUTTER AND USER INTERFACE PIN ENTRY
2y 4m to grant Granted May 05, 2026
Patent 12511641
SELECTION OF DIGITAL PROPERTIES FOR TRANSACTIONS
5y 10m to grant Granted Dec 30, 2025
Patent 12475452
Automated Transactions Across Multiple Blockchains with Cryptocurrency Swaps
3y 10m to grant Granted Nov 18, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
27%
Grant Probability
41%
With Interview (+14.4%)
6y 0m (~2y 2m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 406 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month