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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 03/05/2026 has been entered.
The following is a non-final office action in response to the request for continued examination of 03/05/2026.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-5, 7-13, and 15-22, as originally filed 03/05/2026, are pending and have been examined on the merits (claims 1, 9, and 17 being independent). Claims 1-5, 7, 9-13, 15, 17-19, and 21-22 have been amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments and amendments filed 03/05/2026 have been fully considered.
Applicants assert that the pending claims fully comply with the requirement of 35 U.S.C. 101. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant’s argument and amendments have been considered and are not persuasive. The rejections under 35 USC 101 have been maintained and clarified in view of the USPTO MPEP 2106.
Applicant’s arguments (see applicant’s remarks, pages 14-20):
(1) Applicant arguments that “Here, Page 6 of the Office Action alleges that the claims recite certain methods of organizing human activity. Applicant respectfully disagrees.” (see page 15), are not found persuasive.
In response (1): As set forth in the previous Office action, Examiner considers that the cited limitations as drafted are systems and methods that, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of a method of organizing human activity, but for the recitation of the generic computer components. Further, none of the limitations recite technological implementations details for any of the steps but, instead, only recite broad functional language being performed by the generic use of at least one processor, an application programming interface (API), and/or a graphical user interface (GUI). Providing financial offerings (e.g., loan or a payment account) based on application data associated with a user is a fundamental economic practice long prevalent in commerce systems. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers a fundamental economic principles or practices and/or commercial or legal interactions but for the general linking and/or applying to a technological environment, then it falls within the organizing human activity grouping of abstract ideas. So Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive.
(2) Applicant arguments that “Pages 6-7 of the Office Action allege that the claims do not integrate any alleged judicial exception into a practical application. Applicant respectfully disagrees….. Thus, in this case, "a technical explanation of the asserted improvement is present in the specification, and ... the claim reflects the asserted improvement," which is sufficient to establish a practical application. MPEP § 2106.05(a).” (see pages 15-19), are not found persuasive.
In response (2): In the instant application, Examiner considers that additional elements (e.g., processor, an application programming interface (API), a new application, a user computing device, a user computing device, a first display area, a second display area, database, a graphical user interface (GUI), digital wallet) amount to simply applying the abstract idea to a computer component and/or applying the abstract idea of filtering on a computer do not apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that that imposes a meaningful limitation on the judicial exception (i.e. apply it with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea - see MPEP 2106.05(f)). For example as argued, “Utilizing data associated with a consumer for multiple authorizations and/or approvals simplifies known processes for applying for, as examples, loans or payment accounts. Accordingly, improved systems and methods for access credentials are desired” (see remarks, pages 15-16), it is a business solution to a business problem, not technical solution to a technical problem. So Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive.
(3) Applicant arguments that “For at least the reasons provided above, the present claims also satisfy Step 2B. Applicant respectfully submits that it is not well-understood, routine, or conventional in the art at least to perform the steps of Claim 1 recited above.” (see page 19), are not found persuasive.
In response (3): In the instant application, Examiner considers that the claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration into a practical application, the additional elements amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exactly using generic computer component. The claim elements when considered separately and in an ordered combination, do not add significantly more than implementing the abstract idea. So Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive.
With regard to the rejections of the claims under 35 USC 103, Applicant’s arguments and amendments have been considered but are not persuasive and Examiner respectfully disagrees. Examiner notes that Applicant is arguing newly amended claim language. Further as noted in the citation above the prior art and the amendments are addressed by the rejections cited under 35 USC 103.
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 1-5, 7-13, and 15-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter without significantly more.
When considering subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. 101, (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. If the claim does fall within one of the statutory categories, (2a) 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 (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 include fundamental economic practices; certain methods of organizing human activities; an idea itself; and mathematical relationships/formulas. Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank International, et al., 573 U.S. (2014).
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.
Step (1): In the instant case, the claims are directed towards to a method for providing financial offerings (e.g., loan or a payment account) based on application data associated with a user which contains the steps of receiving, identifying, comparing, qualifying, causing, receiving, and initiating. The claim recites a series of steps and, therefore, is a process. The claims do fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because claim 1 is direct to a computer system, claim 9 is direct to one non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, and claim 17 is direct to a method, i.e. machines programmed to carrying out process steps, Step 1-yes.
Step (2A) Prong 1: A method for providing financial offerings (e.g., a loan or a payment account) based on application data associated with a user is akin to the abstract idea subject matter grouping of: Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity as fundamental economic principles or practices and commercial or legal interactions including agreements in the form of contracts. As such, the claims include an abstract idea.
The specific limitations of the invention are (a) identified to encompass the abstract idea include: {… accessing data from external data sources; identifying offers to provide to candidate users; receive application data associated with a candidate user and a first offering via a user computing device associated with the candidate user…, the first offering comprising a first set of first offering parameters stored … for qualifying the candidate user to receive a first product; request identity data ….. verifying an identity of the candidate user and accessing secure user data associated with the candidate user from at least one external data source; identify that the candidate user qualifies for the first offering by electronically comparing a first portion of the application data and the secure user data to the first set of first offering parameters stored …; in response to the candidate user qualifying for the first offering, identify a second offering associated with a second set of second offering parameters that is stored in the database as being linked with the first offering; electronically compare, …., a second portion of the application data and the secure user data with the second set of second offering parameters stored within the database without requesting any further data from the candidate user; based on the second portion of the application data and the secure user data satisfying the second set of second offering parameters and therefore qualifying for the second offering, wherein the second offering is associated with a second product different from the first product: transmit provisioning data …. providing the second offering, the provisioning data indicating i) that the candidate user qualifies for the first offering and ii) that the candidate user qualifies for the second offering; cause display ….. a confirmation indicating that the candidate user qualifies for the first offering, …. a description of the second offering along with a user selectable input for accepting the second offering without additional information from the candidate user; receive an input indicating acceptance of the second offering based on selection of the user selectable input; cause ….. initiate activation of electronic credentials associated with the second offering at least in part by transmitting a push provision message to a digital enablement service that causes a tokenized version of the electronic credentials associated with the second offering to be electronically generated; cause the tokenized version of the electronic credentials to be stored …… as being active and associated with the electronic credentials such that the tokenized version of the electronic credentials is available in real time to be used in payment transactions; cause the tokenized version of the electronic credentials to be stored in ….. associated with the candidate user, ….. the tokenized version of the electronic credentials in …., the tokenized version of the electronic credentials is configured to initiate real-time payment transactions …...}
As stated above, this abstract idea falls into the (b) subject matter grouping of: Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity as fundamental economic principles or practices and commercial or legal interactions as providing financial offerings (e.g., a loan or a payment account) based on application data associated with a user.
Step (2A) Prong 2: The instant claims do not integrate the exception into a practical application because additional elements: 1) “one processor”, “via an application programming interface (API)”, “a user computing device”, “a graphical user interface (GUI)”, and “digital wallet” amount to simply applying the abstract idea to a computer component. (e.g. “apply it”) 2) “a first display area and a second display area at a graphical user interface (GUI)”, again describes a generically interactive element, which amounts to simply applying the abstract idea of filtering on a computer. (e.g. “apply it” or equivalent) do not apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that that imposes a meaningful limitation on the judicial exception (i.e. generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use - see MPEP 2106.05(h) or apply it with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea - see MPEP 2106.05(f)).
The instant recited claims including additional elements (i.e., processor, an application programming interface (API), a new application, a user computing device, a first display area, a second display area, database, a graphical user interface (GUI), storage, and digital wallet) 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 paragraph [0005]: memory, processor, an application programming interface (API), a first display area and a second display area at a graphical user interface (GUI), a user computing device) as apply it with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea- see MPEP 2106.05(f) or merely add insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception. (MPEP 2106.05(g)). Therefore, the claims are directed to an abstract idea
Step (2B): 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., processor, an application programming interface (API), a new application, a user computing device, a first display area, a second display area, database, a graphical user interface (GUI), storage, and digital wallet) amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exactly using generic computer component. The claim elements when considered separately and in an ordered combination, do not add significantly more than implementing the abstract idea over a generic computer/network with a generic interactive interface element.
The computer is merely a platform on which the abstract idea is implemented. Simply executing an abstract concept on a computer does not render a computer “specialized,” nor does it transform a patent-ineligible claim into a patent-eligible one. See Bancorp Servs., LLC v. Sun Life Assurance Co. of Can., 687 F.3d 1266, 1280 (Fed. Cir. 2012). There are no improvements to another technology or technical field, no improvements to the functioning of the computer itself, transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing or any other meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment as a result of performing the claimed method. Also, the addition of merely novel or non-routine components to the claimed idea does not necessarily turn an abstraction into something concrete (See Ultramercial, Inc. v. Hulu, LLC, _ F.3d_, 2014 WL 5904902, (Fed. Cir. Nov. 14, 2014). Hence, the claims do not recite significantly more than 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.
Dependent claims 2-5, 7-8, 10-13, 15-16, and 18-22 when analyzed as a whole and in an ordered combination are held to be patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the additional recited limitation(s) fail(s) to establish that the claim(s) is/are not directed to an abstract idea, as detailed below. The additional recited limitations in the dependent claims only refine the abstract idea.
For instance, in claims 2, 10 and 18, the step of “… whether the user qualifies for the first offering based on at least one of….” (i.e., qualifying an offer), in claims 3 and 11, the step of “… compare the application data with the second set of second offering parameters associated with the second offering ….” (i.e., comparing data), in claims 4 and 12, the step of “… initiate activation of the electronic credentials by automatically provisioning a digital version of a payment account...” (i.e., initiating activation), in claims 5, 13, and 19, the step of “… cause the digital version of the payment account to be tokenized into a tokenized digital version of the payment account;...” (i.e., transmitting payment account), in claims 7 and 15, the step of “… wherein the first offering comprises a loan offering and wherein the application data comprises income data associated with the candidate user ...” (i.e., obtaining application data), in claims 8, 16, and 20, the step of “… identify a consent to receive payment account offerings, wherein the consent is included in the application data and wherein the second offering comprises at least one payment account offering; and receive the application data and compare the application data ...” (i.e., identifying a consent), in claim 21, the step of “… causes the tokenized version of the electronic credentials to be available to initiate payment transactions. ...” (i.e., credentials to initiate payment), and in claim 22, the step of “… cause the tokenized version of the electronic credentials to further be stored by the digital enablement service ...” (i.e., storing credentials) are all processes that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of a fundamental economic practice but for the recitation of a generic computer component. Providing financial offerings (e.g., a loan or a payment account) to an individual using an interactive user interface (e.g., a graphical user interface) is a most fundamental commercial process.
This is an abstract concept with nothing more and is also considered mere instructions to apply an exception akin to a commonplace business method or mathematical algorithm being applied on a general purpose computer, Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd.; Gottschalk and Versata Dev. Group, Inc.; see MPEP 2106.05(f)(2).
In dependent claims 2-5, 7-8, 10-13, 15-16, and 18-22, the step claimed are rejected under the same analysis and rationale as the independent claims 1, 9, and 17 above. Merely claiming the same process using application data associated with an individual in order to provide financial offerings (e.g., loan or a payment account) does not change the abstract idea without an inventive concept or significantly more. Clearly, the additional recited limitations in the dependent claims only refine the abstract idea further. Further refinement of an abstract idea does not convert an abstract idea into something concrete.
Therefore, claims 1-5, 7-13, and 15-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
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 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.
In the rejections below, where claims are currently amended, this is indicated by underlining.
Claims 1-5, 7-13, and 15-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lancaster et al. (hereinafter Lancaster), US Publication Number 2002/0194094 A1 in view of Buerger et al. (hereinafter Buerger), US Publication Number 2020/0294095 A1 in further view of Bryant et al. (hereinafter Bryant), US Publication Number 2017/0337626 A1.
Regarding claim 1:
Lancaster discloses the following:
A computing system comprising: (see Lancaster, abstract)
a data management system for accessing (reads on “Such customer information may be gathered from public records or sources.”) data from external data sources; (see Lancaster, [0031] “Customer information may include credit history information obtained from one or more sources, such as credit bureau 150. Customer information may also include financial information (e.g., salary, outstanding debt, financial assets, etc.) and demographic information (e.g., age, marital status, address, etc.). Such customer information may be gathered from public records or sources.”)
an access credential (AC) computing device for identifying (reads on “analyze the customer information to determine the financial status or needs of the customer.”) offers to provide to candidate users; (see Lancaster, [0032] “The financial institution may analyze the customer information to determine the financial status or needs of the customer. For example, the customer information may be analyzed to determine the financial status of the customer and identify another financial account or product (e.g., an "associated product") that can be offered to the customer. Optionally, the base product and associated product may be linked or associated in accordance with the financial needs of the customer.”)
at least one memory with instructions stored thereon and; at least one processor in communication with the at least one memory, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to: (see Lancaster, Fig. 1 and [0067] “The offer determination module, such as module 550 illustrated in FIG. 5, may be implemented through any suitable combination of hardware, software and/or firmware. For example, offer determination module 550 may be a software-based application that is executed by a computer or server of the financial institution.”, and see also [0029])
receive (reads on “the financial institution gathers and analyzes customer information”) application data associated with a candidate user and a first offering via a user computing device (reads on “To facilitate communication through channel 140, each customer ll0A-ll0N may include a personal computer, workstation, laptop, personal digital assistant (PDA), wireless phone, mobile phone, standard telephone or other device capable of communication.”) associated with the candidate user and an application programming interface (API), the first offering comprising a first set of first offering parameters stored within a database for qualifying (reads on “the financial institution may determine if the customer qualifies for the base product and, if so, process or set-up a new account for the financial product.”) the candidate user to receive a first product; (see Lancaster, [0044] “After analyzing the customer information, a determination is made whether to offer one or more associated product(s) to the customer (step 315). As indicated above, whether to offer an associated product may be determined based on the financial history or needs of the customer. Such a determination may also be performed based on pre-defined solicitation criteria or the customer's preferences concerning the features or terms of the base product. If a determination is made not to make the offer (step 315; No), then the customer's application for the base product is processed as normal (step 320). In such a case, the financial institution may determine if the customer qualifies for the base product and, if so, process or set-up a new account for the financial product.”, and see also [0029])
request (reads on “customer information may be gathered from a questionnaire or application completed by the customer”) identity data from the user computing device for verifying (reads on “the financial institution gathers and analyzes customer information”) an identity of the candidate user and accessing secure user data (reads on “Customer information may include credit history information obtained from one or more sources, such as credit bureau 150.”) associated with the candidate user from at least one external data source; (see Lancaster, [0031] “After the contact or request is made by the customer, the financial institution gathers and analyzes customer information (step 220). Customer information may include credit history information obtained from one or more sources, such as credit bureau 150. Customer information may also include financial information (e.g., salary, outstanding debt, financial assets, etc.) and demographic information (e.g., age, marital status, address, etc.). Such customer information may be gathered from public records or sources. Alternatively, or in addition to using public sources, customer information may be gathered from a questionnaire or application completed by the customer prior to or after the contact is made”)
verify the identity of the candidate user based upon the application data and the identity data; (see Lancaster, [0032] “The gathered customer information is then analyzed by the financial institution (step 220). The financial institution may analyze the customer information to determine the financial status or needs of the customer.”, and see also [0031])
in response to verifying (reads on “the process begins by analyzing the customer information (step 450)”) the identity of the candidate user based upon the application data and the identity data, retrieve (reads on “If, for example, a customer's credit history or rating was not previously gathered (e.g., at step 410 in FIG. 4A), then such information may be additionally gathered at step 450 from one or more public sources (such as credit bureau 150 in FIG. 1)”), by the data management system, the secure user data associated with the candidate user from the at least one external data source; (see Lancaster, [0061] “As illustrated in FIG. 4B, the process begins by analyzing the customer information (step 450). As indicated above, customer information may include the customer's financial information (e.g., salary, outstanding debt, financial assets, etc.) and demographic information (e.g., age, marital status, address, etc.). Customer information may also include a customer's credit history or rating. If, for example, a customer's credit history or rating was not previously gathered (e.g., at step 410 in FIG. 4A), then such information may be additionally gathered at step 450 from one or more public sources (such as credit bureau 150 in FIG. 1).”)
identify that the candidate user qualifies for the first offering by electronically comparing a first portion of the application data and the secure user data to the first set of first offering parameters stored within the database; (see Lancaster, [0044] “After analyzing the customer information, a determination is made whether to offer one or more associated product(s) to the customer (step 315). As indicated above, whether to offer an associated product may be determined based on the financial history or needs of the customer. Such a determination may also be performed based on pre-defined solicitation criteria or the customer's preferences concerning the features or terms of the base product. If a determination is made not to make the offer (step 315; No), then the customer's application for the base product is processed as normal (step 320). In such a case, the financial institution may determine if the customer qualifies for the base product and, if so, process or set-up a new account for the financial product.”)
in response to the candidate user qualifying (reads on “The customer's qualification for the base product may be determined”) for the first offering, identify (reads on “When a determination is made to make an offer (step 415; Yes), the customer may be informed that he/she may qualify for the offer from the financial institution (step 425).”) a second offering associated with a second set of second offering parameters that is stored in the database as being linked with the first offering; (see Lancaster, [0057] “The customer's qualification for the base product may be determined based on the customer's financial and/or credit history.” and [0058] “When a determination is made to make an offer (step 415; Yes), the customer may be informed that he/she may qualify for the offer from the financial institution (step 425).”)
electronically compare, by the AC computing device, a second portion of the application data and the secure user data with the second set of second offering parameters stored within the database without requesting any further data from the candidate user; (see Lancaster, [0032] “The financial institution may analyze the customer information to determine the financial status or needs of the customer. For example, the customer information may be analyzed to determine the financial status of the customer and identify another financial account or product (e.g., an "associated product") that can be offered to the customer. Optionally, the base product and associated product may be linked or associated in accordance with the financial needs of the customer.”, and Notes: As cited, determining the rates and terms of each offer to present to the customer without requesting additional data.”)
based on the second portion of the application data and the secure user data satisfying the second set of second offering parameters and therefore qualifying for the second offering, wherein the second offering is associated with a second product (reads on “a CD account”) different from the first product (reads on “a credit card account”): (see Lancaster, [0056] “After analyzing the customer information, a determination is made whether to offer one or more associated product(s) to the customer (step 415). For example, as stated above, predetermined solicitation criteria may be used to determine if the customer's preferences match a customer profile for the associated product. Thus, if the base product corresponds to a CD account and the associated product is a credit card account, the customer's preferences regarding the CD deposit amount and term of the CD deposit may be analyzed to determine if the customer's preferences match a profile for offering a credit card account or another financial product. Alternatively, associated product(s) may be automatically offered whenever a specific base product is requested by a customer. Thus, if a customer contacts the financial institution regarding a CD account, the customer may automatically be offered an associated product, such as a credit card account.”, and [0084] “the base product could be a financial product for conducting transactions and the associated product could be a financial product for investing. For instance, the embodiment of FIGS. 4A and 4B could be modified such that the base product is a credit card account requested by the customer and the associated product is a CD account offered by the financial institution.”)
transmit provisioning data (reads on “The gathered customer information is then analyzed by the financial institution (step 220). the customer information may be analyzed to determine the financial status of the customer and identify another financial account or product (e.g., an "associated product") that can be offered to the customer.”) to an issuer computing system associated with providing the second offering, the provisioning data indicating i) that the candidate user qualifies for the first offering (reads on “the base product”) and ii) that the candidate user qualifies for the second offering (reads on “associated product”); (see Lancaster, [0032] “The gathered customer information is then analyzed by the financial institution (step 220). The financial institution may analyze the customer information to determine the financial status or needs of the customer. For example, the customer information may be analyzed to determine the financial status of the customer and identify another financial account or product (e.g., an "associated product") that can be offered to the customer. Optionally, the base product and associated product may be linked or associated in accordance with the financial needs of the customer.”, and see also [0033] “The customer may then be offered one or more associated products based on the analysis of the gathered customer information (step 230).”)
receive an input indicating acceptance of the second offering based on selection of the user selectable input; (see Lancaster, [0046] “If the customer accepts the offer (step 330; Yes), then processing continues to process the customer's application for the base product and the one or more associated product(s) (step 335). In this case, the financial institution 170 may determine if the customer qualifies for the base product and associated product and, if so, process or establish new accounts for the financial products.”)
Lancaster does not explicitly disclose the following, however Buerger further teaches:
cause display of a first display area and a second display area at a graphical user interface (GUI) of the user computing device, wherein the first display area (reads on “new auto loan”) comprises a confirmation indicating that the candidate user qualifies for the first offering, and the second display area (reads on “holiday loan”) comprises a description of the second offering along with a user selectable input for accepting the second offering without additional information from the candidate user; (see Buerger, figs. 7A-7E, figs. 8A-8H, and [0142-0143], and notes: As cited, showing and offering the suit of products (i.e. the first offering and second offering) without requesting additional information)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify providing financials products to customers in association with one or more other financial products according to the customer's financial needs of Lancaster to include a series of single computer displays that show one or more financial products, e.g., loan or payment account, via a graphical user interface, as taught by Buerger, in order to provide faster transactions. (see Buerger, figs. 7A-7E, figs. 8A-8H, and [0142-0143])
Lancaster and Buerger do not explicitly disclose the following, however Bryant further teaches:
cause the issuer computing system to initiate activation of electronic credentials associated with the second offering at least in part by transmitting a push provision message to a digital enablement service that causes a tokenized version of the electronic credentials associated with the second offering to be electronically generated; (see Bryant, [0050] “when activated, displays a list of available payment accounts in the payment application including, in the illustrated interface 500, the new account issued to the consumer 114, i.e., "Merchant A Rewards" (which is selected, as indicated by the check mark). Details for the new account (as selected from the available payment accounts in the payment application) are also provided in the interface 500, for example, the account owner's name, the account number, the expiration date for the new account, and the CCV for the new account… the communication device 118 communicates the credentials associated with the new account to the POS terminal for funding the purchase transaction, and see also [0049])
cause the tokenized version of the electronic credentials to be stored in the at least one memory as being active and associated with the electronic credentials such that the tokenized version of the electronic credentials is available in real time to be used in payment transactions; and (see Bryant, [0030] “The credit offer engine 122 is further configured to, when the application is approved, cause the account to be issued to the consumer 114 (directly, or via issuer 108 as associated with issuing the new account, etc.), and transmit credentials associated with the new account to the consumer's communication device 118 (e.g., in tokenized form, etc.).” and [0048] “Once issued, the credentials associated with the new account are transmitted to the offer interface engine 120 (or payment application), via the communication device 118.”, and see also [0050])
cause the tokenized version of the electronic credentials to be stored in a digital wallet associated with the candidate user, wherein upon storage of the tokenized version of the electronic credentials in the digital wallet, the tokenized version of the electronic credentials is configured to initiate real-time payment transactions from the digital wallet. (see Bryant, [0050] “when activated, displays a list of available payment accounts in the payment application including, in the illustrated interface 500, the new account issued to the consumer 114, i.e., "Merchant A Rewards" (which is selected, as indicated by the check mark). In use, as described above with reference to FIG. 1, to initiate a payment transaction, for example, the consumer 114 selects the new account in interface 500 and presents the communication device 118 to the merchant 102 and, in particular, to the POS terminal at the merchant 102. In doing so, the communication device 118 communicates the credentials associated with the new account to the POS terminal for funding the purchase transaction.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify providing financials products to customers in association with one or more other financial products according to the customer's financial needs of Lancaster to include appending credentials (e.g., in tokenized form) associated with the credit account to a payment application of the consumer, as taught by Bryant, in order to provide easier and more secure transactions. (see Bryant, [0048-0049])
Regarding claim 2:
Lancaster discloses the following:
The computing system of Claim 1, wherein the instructions further cause the at least one processor to identify that the candidate user qualifies for the first offering (reads on “the base product”) based on at least one of i) a message received by the at least one processor indicating that the candidate user qualifies for the first offering or ii) applying a second set of one or more parameters to the application data. (see Lancaster, [0042] “After the initial contact is made, the financial institution 170 gathers and analyzes customer information (step 310). Customer information may include basic financial information (e.g., salary, outstanding debt, financial assets, etc.) and demographic information (e.g., age, marital status, address, etc.) of the customer that is needed to initiate and process an application for the base product. The customer information may also include the preferences of the customer regarding the terms or features of the base product.”)
Regarding claim 3:
Lancaster discloses the following:
The computing system of Claim 1, wherein the instructions further cause the at least one processor to compare the application data with the second set of second offering parameters associated with the second offering when the candidate user qualifies for the first offering. (see Lancaster, [0065] “Referring again to FIG. 4B, if it is determined that the customer does not qualify for one or more of the financial products (step 455; No), then processing terminates with notification to the customer (step 460). If, however, the customer has been approved (step 455; Yes), then processing continues to step 465 in FIG. 4B.”, and [0066] “At step 465, the financial institution determines the rates and terms of each offer to present to the customer (step 465). As indicated above, one or more different product combinations may be offered to the customer, where each product combination includes different sets of rates and terms for the base product and the associated product(s). The financial institution may analyze the customer information, including financial and credit information and the customer's indicated preferences, to determine the set of offers to present to the customer.”)
Regarding claim 4:
Lancaster and Buerger do not explicitly disclose the following, however Bryant further teaches:
The computing system of Claim 1, wherein the instructions further cause the at least one processor to initiate (reads on “when activated, displays a list of available payment accounts in the payment application”) activation of the electronic credentials by automatically provisioning a digital version (reads on “an electronic wallet”) of a payment account associated with the second offering. (see Bryant, [0050] “when activated, displays a list of available payment accounts in the payment application including, in the illustrated interface 500, the new account issued to the consumer 114, i.e., "Merchant A Rewards" (which is selected, as indicated by the check mark). Details for the new account (as selected from the available payment accounts in the payment application) are also provided in the interface 500, for example, the account owner's name, the account number, the expiration date for the new account, and the CCV for the new account.”, and see also [0016])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify providing financials products to customers in association with one or more other financial products according to the customer's financial needs of Lancaster to include appending a credit account to an electronic wallet, as taught by Bryant, in order to provide easier and faster transactions. (see Bryant, [0016])
Regarding claim 5:
Lancaster and Buerger do not explicitly disclose the following, however Bryant further teaches:
The computing system of Claim 4, wherein the instructions further cause the at least one processor to:
cause the digital version of the payment account to be tokenized into a tokenized digital version of the payment account by transmitting the push provision message; and (see Bryant, [0030] “The credit offer engine 122 is further configured to, when the application is approved, cause the account to be issued to the consumer 114 (directly, or via issuer 108 as associated with issuing the new account, etc.), and transmit credentials associated with the new account to the consumer's communication device 118 (e.g., in tokenized form, etc.).”, and [0032] “the offer interface engine 120 may be configured to operate apart from any payment application and, for example, push a notifications for an offer to the consumer 114 at the communication device 118.”)
automatically store the tokenized digital version of the payment account in the digital wallet associated with the candidate user. (see Bryant, [0011] “the account is a credit payment account (although the present disclosure is not limited such an account), which is appended to a payment application included in the consumer's communication device promptly after issuance (e.g., the credit payment account is tokenized and inserted into an electronic wallet associated with the consumer's communication device, etc.).”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify providing financials products to customers in association with one or more other financial products according to the customer's financial needs of Lancaster to include appending credentials (e.g., in tokenized form) associated with the credit account to a payment application of the consumer, as taught by Bryant, in order to provide easier and more secure transactions. (see Bryant, [0048-0049])
Regarding claim 7:
Lancaster and Buerger do not explicitly disclose the following, however Bryant further teaches:
The computing system of Claim 1, wherein the first offering comprises a loan offering and wherein the application data comprises income data associated with the candidate user and address data associated with the candidate user. (see Bryant, [0035] “the offer interface engine 120 may include a consumer profile data structure (not shown), in which certain information about the consumer 114 is included (e.g., name, mailing address, birth date, social security number, current employment, business address, income information, etc.).”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify providing financials products to customers in association with one or more other financial products according to the customer's financial needs of Lancaster to include appending a credit account to an electronic wallet, as taught by Bryant, in order to provide easier and faster transactions. (see Bryant, [0016])
Regarding claim 8:
Lancaster discloses the following:
The computing system of Claim 1, wherein the instructions further cause the at least one processor to:
identify a consent to receive payment account offerings, wherein the consent is included in the application data and wherein the second offering comprises at least one payment account offering; and (see Lancaster, [0059] “After presenting the offer, the customer may be given the option to decline the offer, or accept the offer and determine if they qualify for the associated product(s).”, and see also [0043])
receive the application data and compare the application data with the second set of second offering parameters associated with the second offering in response to identifying the consent. (see Lancaster, [0060] “If the customer accepts the offer (step 430; Yes), then processing continues to analyze the customer information to provide different options for the customer (step 435) and process the customer's application for the selected base product and associated product(s) (step 440).”)
Regarding claim 21:
Lancaster and Buerger do not explicitly disclose the following, however Bryant further teaches:
The computing system of Claim 1, wherein the tokenized version of the electronic credentials being stored in the at least one memory causes the tokenized version of the electronic credentials to be available to initiate the payment transactions. (see Bryant, [0030] “The credit offer engine 122 is further configured to, when the application is approved, cause the account to be issued to the consumer 114 (directly, or via issuer 108 as associated with issuing the new account, etc.), and transmit credentials associated with the new account to the consumer's communication device 118 (e.g., in tokenized form, etc.).”, and [0049] “Upon receipt of the credentials for the new payment account, the offer interface engine 120 appends, at 332, the credit account to the payment application at the communication device 118, whereby the consumer 114 is able to fund purchase transactions with the merchant 102 through the new credit payment account.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify providing financials products to customers in association with one or more other financial products according to the customer's financial needs of Lancaster to include appending credentials (e.g., in tokenized form) associated with the credit account to a payment application of the consumer, as taught by Bryant, in order to provide easier and more secure transactions. (see Bryant, [0048-0049])
Regarding claim 22:
Lancaster and Buerger do not explicitly disclose the following, however Bryant further teaches:
The computing system of Claim 1, wherein the instructions further cause the at least one processor to cause the tokenized version of the electronic credentials to further be stored by the digital enablement service as being associated with a primary account number of the electronic credentials. (see Bryant, [0048] “the credit offer engine 122 (alone or in combination with issuer 108 (if not incorporated therein)) causes a credit payment account to be issued, at 330. The issued account includes a credit limit, an interest rate, and credit account payment information (e.g., credit card number, expiration date, card verification value (CCV), etc.) (broadly, credentials) that enables the consumer 114 to initiate transactions using the credit account (or otherwise use the account, depending on account type, etc.) at the merchant 102.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify providing financials products to customers in association with one or more other financial products according to the customer's financial needs of Lancaster to include appending credentials (e.g., in tokenized form) associated with the credit account to a payment application of the consumer, as taught by Bryant, in order to provide easier and more secure transactions. (see Bryant, [0048-0049])
Regarding claims 9 and 17: it is similar scope to claim 1, and thus it is rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claims 10 and 18: it is similar scope to claim 2, and thus it is rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 11: it is similar scope to claim 3, and thus it is rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 12: it is similar scope to claim 4, and thus it is rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claims 13 and 19: it is similar scope to claim 5, and thus it is rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 15: it is similar scope to claim 7, and thus it is rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claims 16 and 20: it is similar scope to claim 8, and thus it is rejected under similar rationale.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record but not relied upon herein but pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure is listed in the enclosed PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YONG S PARK whose telephone number is (571)272-8349. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:00 PM, 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, Bennett M. Sigmond can be reached on (303)297-4411. 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.
/YONGSIK PARK/Examiner, Art Unit 3694
April 3, 2026
/BENNETT M SIGMOND/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3694