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 .
Status of Claims
This final office action is responsive to Applicant’s submission filed 02/13/2026. Currently, claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1, 9 and 17 have been amended. No claims have been added and/or cancelled.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 are allowed over prior art.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
None of the cited and/or relevant prior art, single or in combination, teaches the combined limitations:
“determine whether a user of the mobile computing device intended to perform a remuneration action with the terminal device by applying only the user intention model to the sensor data, and
wherein the user intention model differentiates a first portion of three- dimensional X-Y-Z orientations in the spatial environment of the mobile computing device that indicate a first intent to perform the remuneration action with the terminal device and a second portion of the three-dimensional X-Y-Z orientations in the spatial environment of the mobile computing device that indicate a second intent to not perform the remuneration action with the terminal device”,
as recited in claim 1.
Claims 9 and 17 recite similar limitations as set forth in claim 1, and therefore are patentable over prior art.
Claims 5-7 and 13-15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 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 1-4, 8-12 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., abstract idea) without significantly more.
The claims recite method, system and computer program product for identifying a payment transaction using a user intention model.
Exemplary claim 1 recites in part,
“generate sensor data indicating orientation…in a spatial environment”
retrieve the sensor data from the sensor data repository in response to detecting the remuneration trigger event,
determine whether a user of the mobile computing device intended to perform a remuneration action with the terminal device by applying only the user intention model to the sensor data, and
generate remuneration credentials in response to determining that the user of the mobile computing device intended to perform the remuneration action.”
The above limitations describe the steps of, 1) acquiring data (sensor data), retrieving stored data, 3) analyzing the acquired data using a model, and 4) generating a result.
The above steps describe the process of identifying a potential payment transaction using a model. The above limitations, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, encompass "Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity" (managing personal behavior or relationship or interaction between people) enumerated in MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II)(C). If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers managing interactions between people, then it falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The cited claims recite additional elements in the form of a computing device having a processor, a memory (remuneration application, remuneration data repository, sensor data repository), communication interface and one or more sensors, to perform the limitations encompassing the abstract ideas identified above. The computing device represents using a computer as a tool to perform the judicial exception as in MPEP 2106.05(f). In addition, the steps of “storing remuneration data, sensor data and remuneration application”, “communication with a terminal”, “detecting a remuneration trigger event” and “transmitting remuneration credentials” represents storing, obtaining and transmitting data, which amounts to insignificant extra-solution activities that do not impose meaningful limits on the abstract idea. See MPEP 2106.05(g).
In addition, the limitation “wherein the user intention model differentiates a first portion of three-dimensional X-Y-Z orientations in the spatial environment of the mobile computing device that indicate a first intent to perform the remuneration action with the terminal device and a second portion of the three-dimensional X-Y-Z orientations in the spatial environment of the mobile computing device that indicate a second intent to not perform the remuneration action with the terminal device” simply describes the idea of the solution or outcome of the “user intention model”. The claim simply describes the two outcomes of the “user intention model” by differentiating a first and second portion of three-dimensional X-Y-Z orientation in a spatial environment of the mobile device to determine a user’s intent. The claims fail to describe how the “user intention model” when applied to the retrieved sensor data determines a user intent, to perform or not to perform, a remuneration action. See MPEP 2106.05(f)(1).
When considered both individually and as a whole, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
The recitation of additional elements is acknowledged as identified above. The discussion with respect to practical application is equally applicable to consideration of whether the additional elements amount to significantly more. “Transmitting/obtaining information over a network” and “storing and retrieving data” have been recognized by the courts as a well-understood, routine, and conventional function (see MPEP 2106.05(d)). In addition, the computing device represents using a computer as a tool to perform the judicial exception as in MPEP 2106.05(f). The limitation “wherein the user intention model differentiates a first portion of three-dimensional X-Y-Z orientations in the spatial environment of the mobile computing device that indicate a first intent to perform the remuneration action with the terminal device and a second portion of the three-dimensional X-Y-Z orientations in the spatial environment of the mobile computing device that indicate a second intent to not perform the remuneration action with the terminal device”, simply describes the idea of the solution or outcome of the “user intention model”, which amounts to mere instructions to apply an exception. See MPEP 2106.05(f)(1).
Therefore, there are no meaningful recitations, considered in combination, that transform the judicial exception into a patent eligible application such that the claim amounts to significantly more than the judicial exception itself.
Accordingly, claim 1 is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., abstract idea) without significantly more.
Claims 9 and 17 recite similar limitations as set forth in claim 1, and therefore are rejected based on similar rationale.
Dependent claims 2-4, 8, 10-12, 16 and 18-20 recite limitations directed to the abstract idea, and do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application nor amount to significantly more.
Response to Arguments
101 Rejection
Applicant's arguments filed 02/13/2026 with respect to the rejection of claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. §101 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to Applicant’s arguments, Examiner respectfully disagrees.
As discussed above under section 101, the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
The claimed invention generates and stored sensor data associated with a mobile computing device within a spatial environment. The stored sensor data is retrieved and analyzed using a user intention model to determine a user’s intention to perform a remuneration action. The claim steps describe the process of identifying a potential transaction using a model, which falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” (managing personal behavior or relationship or interaction between people) grouping of abstract ideas.
The additional element, “wherein the user intention model differentiates a first portion of three- dimensional X-Y-Z orientations in the spatial environment of the mobile computing device that indicate a first intent to perform the remuneration action with the terminal device and a second portion of the three-dimensional X-Y-Z orientations in the spatial environment of the mobile computing device that indicate a second intent to not perform the remuneration action with the terminal device” simply describes the idea of the solution or outcome of the “user intention model”. The claim describes the two outcomes of the “user intention model” by differentiating a first and second portion of three-dimensional X-Y-Z orientation in a spatial environment of the mobile device to determine a user’s intent. The claims fail to describe how the “user intention model” when applied to the retrieved sensor data determines a user intent, to perform or not to perform, a remuneration action. The additional element amounts to mere instructions to apply the exception, because it recites no more than an idea of a solution or outcome. See MPEP 2106.05(f)(1).
When considered both individually and as a whole, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application nor amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Accordingly, the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., abstract idea) without significantly more.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OLUSEGUN GOYEA whose telephone number is (571)270-5402. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9am-5pm 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, FAHD OBEID can be reached at 5712703324. 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.
/OLUSEGUN GOYEA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627
Prosecution Insights