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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 Oct. 09, 2019 has been entered.
Status of Claims
This office action is in response to the claim amendments filed on May 27, 2026.
Claims 1, 3-14 and 16-20 are pending.
Claims 2 and 15 have been canceled.
Claims 1, 3-14 and 16-20 have been examined.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 14 are objected to because of the following informalities: for example, claim 1 recites, “receiving, by a financial institution computer program executed by a financial institution backend…”. However, claim 1 further recites, “identifying, in the database maintained by the financial institution, …”. The language “financial institution backend” (e.g., database maintained by the financial institution backend) is not consistent throughout the claim set. For example, claims 8 recites “…. the token reference identifiers are identified from a database maintained by the financial institution backend”. However, claim 14 recites, “…identifies, in the database maintained by the financial institution, ….”. Appropriate correction is required.
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, 3-14 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea of presenting payment options without significantly more.
In the instant case, claims 1 and 3-13 are directed to a method, and claims 14 and 16-20 are directed to a system, comprising: a financial institution backend comprising a financial institution backend computer processor and executing a financial institution computer program. Therefore, these claims fall within the four statutory categories of invention. (Step 1: YES).
Claim 1 is a method for efficient presentation of payment options at point of sale devices, comprising, which performs a series of steps: “receiving, by a financial institution computer program executed by a financial institution backend, provisioning messages from a payment network identifying payment cards that have been stored or provisioned to customer wallets for a merchant; adding, by the financial institution computer program, the payment cards to a database comprising an identification of a plurality of payment cards that have been stored or provisioned to the customer wallets for the merchant; identifying, in the database maintained by the financial institution, the plurality of payment cards that have been stored in or provisioned to the customer wallets for the merchant; pre-qualifying, by the financial institution computer program, each of the customers associated with the stored or provisioned payment cards for one or more installment payment options for a purchase from the merchant; communicating, by the financial institution computer program, a list of token reference identifiers for stored or provisioned payment cards that have been pre-qualified and the one or more pre-qualified installment payment options to a merchant computer program executed by a merchant backend; receiving, by the merchant computer program, as part of a checkout flow of a checkout user interface, a token reference identifier for a stored or provisioned payment card in one of the customer wallets; determining, by the merchant computer program, that the token reference identifier in the customer wallet is on the list of token reference identifiers that have been pre-qualified for one or more of the installment payment options for the purchase from the merchant, wherein the merchant computer program determines whether the token reference identifier is pre-qualified based only a presence of the token reference identifier being on the list of token reference identifiers that have been pre-qualified for one or more of the installment payment options, thereby limiting a number of times that the merchant computer program communicates with the financial institution computer program; and presenting, by the merchant computer program, the one or more installment payment options associated with the token reference identifier in the customer wallet has been pre-qualified in the checkout flow of the checkout user interface”. These series of steps describe the abstract idea of presenting payment options (with the exception of the italicized terms above), which correspond to “Mental Processes” and “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity”: commercial interactions because it describes a process for carrying out commercial interactions between parties that involves communicating data needed to complete a transaction to the parties. Thus, claim 1 recites an abstract idea. (Step 2A-Prong 1: YES).
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional elements of claim 1, such as a financial institution backend (i.e., a computer. In light of the originally-filed specification [0034]: financial institution backed 110, which may include, for example, servers (e.g., physical and/or cloud-based), computers (e.g., workstations, desktops, laptops,), etc.), payment network, database, merchant backend (i.e., computer. In light of the originally-filed specification [0016]: a merchant backend comprising a merchant backend computer processor) and checkout user interface (e.g., user interface) are no more than simply applying the abstract idea using generic computer elements. Specifically, the financial institution backend, payment network, database, merchant backend and checkout user interface performs the steps or functions of: “receiving, by a financial institution computer program executed by a financial institution backend, provisioning messages from a payment network identifying payment cards that have been stored or provisioned to customer wallets for a merchant; adding, by the financial institution computer program, the payment cards to a database comprising an identification of a plurality of payment cards that have been stored or provisioned to the customer wallets for the merchant; identifying, in the database maintained by the financial institution, the plurality of payment cards that have been stored in or provisioned to the customer wallets for the merchant; pre-qualifying, by the financial institution computer program, each of the customers associated with the stored or provisioned payment cards for one or more installment payment options for a purchase from the merchant; communicating, by the financial institution computer program, a list of token reference identifiers for stored or provisioned payment cards that have been pre-qualified and the one or more pre-qualified installment payment options to a merchant computer program executed by a merchant backend; receiving, by the merchant computer program, as part of a checkout flow of a checkout user interface, a token reference identifier for a stored or provisioned payment card in one of the customer wallets; determining, by the merchant computer program, that the token reference identifier in the customer wallet is on the list of token reference identifiers that have been pre-qualified for one or more of the installment payment options for the purchase from the merchant, wherein the merchant computer program determines whether the token reference identifier is pre-qualified based only a presence of the token reference identifier being on the list of token reference identifiers that have been pre-qualified for one or more of the installment payment options, thereby limiting a number of times that the merchant computer program communicates with the financial institution computer program; and presenting, by the merchant computer program, the one or more installment payment options associated with the token reference identifier in the customer wallet has been pre-qualified in the checkout flow of the checkout user interface”. The additional elements listed above are all recited at a high level of generality and under their broadest reasonable interpretation comprises a generic computing arrangement. The presence of a generic computer arrangement is nothing more than to implement the claimed invention (MPEP 2106.05(f)). Therefore, the recitations of additional elements do not meaningfully apply the abstract idea and hence do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Additionally, with respect to claim language, “thereby limiting a number of times that the merchant computer program communicates with the financial institution computer program”. According to MPEP 2106.05(f)(2): Similarly, "claiming the improved speed or efficiency inherent with applying the abstract idea on a computer" does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide an inventive concept. Thus, claim 1 does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. (Step 2A-Prong 2: NO).
Claim 1 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements of claim 1 such as a financial institution backend, payment network, database, merchant backend and checkout user interface limitations are recited at a high level of generality in that it results in no more than simply applying the abstract idea using generic computer elements. The additional elements when considered separately and as an ordered combination do not amount to add significantly more as these limitations provide nothing more than to simply apply the exception in a generic computer environment. Thus, claim 1 is not patent eligible. (Step 2B: NO).
Claim 8 is directed to a method for efficient presentation of payment options at point of sale devices, comprising, which performs a series of steps: “receiving, by a merchant computer program executed by a merchant backend for a merchant and from a financial institution backend, a list of token reference identifiers for payment cards that have been pre-qualified and one or more pre- qualified installment payment options for the token reference identifiers, wherein the token reference identifiers are identified from a database maintained by the financial institution backend from provisioning messages from a payment network that identify payment cards that have been stored or provisioned to customer wallets for the merchant; storing, by the merchant computer program, the list of token reference identifiers; receiving, by the merchant computer program, a log in to a customer wallet with the merchant as part of a checkout flow for a transaction in a checkout user interface; retrieving, by the merchant computer program, a token reference identifier for a payment card that has been stored in or provisioned to the customer wallet; determining, by the merchant computer program, that the token reference identifier in the customer wallet is on the list of token reference identifiers that have been pre-qualified, wherein the merchant computer program determines whether the token reference identifier is pre-qualified based only a presence of the token reference identifier being on the list of token reference identifiers that have been pre-qualified for one or more of the installment payment options, thereby limiting a number of times that the merchant computer program communicates with the financial institution computer program; and retrieving, by the merchant computer program, the one or more pre-qualified installment payment options for the token reference identifier in the customer wallet; and presenting, by the merchant computer program, the one or more pre- qualified installment payment options in the checkout flow of the checkout user interface.” These series of steps describe the abstract idea of presenting payment options (with the exception of the italicized terms above), which correspond to “Mental Processes” and “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity”: commercial interactions because it describes a process for carrying out commercial interactions between parties that involves communicating data needed to complete a transaction to the parties. Thus, claim 8 recites the abstract idea subject matter similar to that discussed above in connection with claim 1. The identified additional element of claim 8, similar to that discussed above in connection with claim 1, such as a financial institution backend, payment network, database, merchant backend and checkout user interface also fails to recite a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea as it is no more than simply applying the abstract idea using generic computer elements. Thus, claim 8 is rejected on similar grounds as claim 1.
Claim 14 recites subject matter similar to that discussed above in connection with claims 1 and 8. Thus, similar arguments can be extended to the independent 14 and hence, claim 14 is rejected on similar grounds as claims 1 and 8.
Regarding dependent claims
Claims 3, 11 and 16 recite: “The method of claim 1, wherein the pre-qualified installment payment options comprise a reduced interest rate for a period of time” which represents an additional function of the pre-qualified installment payment options and further elaborates on the abstract idea of presenting payment options as noted in claims 1, 8 and 14. The additional elements/functions, alone or in combination, are insufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because the additional elements/functions do not pertain to an improvement to the functioning of a computer or to another technology. The additional elements/functions, alone or in combination, do not offer significantly more than the abstract idea, because the additional elements/functions merely further recite additional instructions to implement the abstract idea on the computer components.
Claim 4 recites: “The method of claim 1, wherein the merchant computer program accesses an offer database to retrieve the installment payment options” which represents an additional function of retrieving the installment payment options and further elaborates on the abstract idea of presenting payment options as noted in claims 1, 8 and 14. Claim 4 further recites previously identified additional element of a database. This additional element is being used in its ordinary capacity. The additional elements/functions, alone or in combination, are insufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because the additional elements/functions do not pertain to an improvement to the functioning of a computer or to another technology. The additional elements/functions, alone or in combination, do not offer significantly more than the abstract idea, because the additional elements/functions merely further recite additional instructions to implement the abstract idea on the computer components.
Claims 12 and 17 recite subject matter similar to that discussed above in connection with claim 4. Accordingly, claims 12 and 17 are rejected under a similar rationale as claim 4.
Claim 5 recites: “The method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving, from the merchant backend, a notification that one of the one or more installment payment options was accepted, wherein the notification comprises an identification of the accepted installment payment option and the token reference identifier” which represents an additional function of receiving a notification. This language describes the characteristics of the installment payment options and further elaborates on the abstract idea of presenting payment options as noted in claims 1, 8 and 14. Claim 5 further recites previously identified additional element of a merchant backend. This additional element is being used in its ordinary capacity. This additional element is being used in its ordinary capacity. The additional elements/functions, alone or in combination, are insufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because the additional elements/functions do not pertain to an improvement to the functioning of a computer or to another technology. The additional elements/functions, alone or in combination, do not offer significantly more than the abstract idea, because the additional elements/functions merely further recite additional instructions to implement the abstract idea on the computer components.
Claims 6 and 20 recite: “The method of claim 1, further comprising: consolidating, by the financial institution computer program, a plurality of accepted installment payment option offers for the same token reference identifier” which represents an additional function of consolidating, a plurality of accepted installment payment option and further elaborates on the abstract idea of presenting payment options as noted in claims 1, 8 and 14. The additional elements/functions, alone or in combination, are insufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because the additional elements/functions do not pertain to an improvement to the functioning of a computer or to another technology. The additional elements/functions, alone or in combination, do not offer significantly more than the abstract idea, because the additional elements/functions merely further recite additional instructions to implement the abstract idea on the computer components.
Claim 7 recites: “The method of claim 1, further comprising: maintaining, by the financial institution computer program, the accepted installment payment option offer separately from other purchases made with the payment card” which represents an additional function of maintaining, the accepted installment payment option and further elaborates on the abstract idea of presenting payment options as noted in claims 1, 8 and 14. The additional elements/functions, alone or in combination, are insufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because the additional elements/functions do not pertain to an improvement to the functioning of a computer or to another technology. The additional elements/functions, alone or in combination, do not offer significantly more than the abstract idea, because the additional elements/functions merely further recite additional instructions to implement the abstract idea on the computer components.
Claim 9 recites: “The method of claim 8, further comprising: receiving, by the merchant computer program, acceptance of one of the one or more pre-qualified installment payment options; notifying, by the merchant computer program, the financial institution backend of the acceptance by providing the token reference identifier and an identifier for the accepted pre-qualified installment payment option; and conducting, by the merchant computer program, a transaction” which represents an additional functions of receiving, acceptance of pre-qualified installment payment options; notifying, the acceptance; and conducting, a transaction and further elaborates on the abstract idea of presenting payment options as noted in claims 1, 8 and 14. Claim 9 further recites previously identified additional element of a financial institution backend. This additional element is being used in its ordinary capacity. This additional element is being used in its ordinary capacity. This additional element is being used in its ordinary capacity. The additional elements/functions, alone or in combination, are insufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because the additional elements/functions do not pertain to an improvement to the functioning of a computer or to another technology. The additional elements/functions, alone or in combination, do not offer significantly more than the abstract idea, because the additional elements/functions merely further recite additional instructions to implement the abstract idea on the computer components.
Claim 10 recites: “The method of claim 9, wherein the transaction is conducted over a payment network, and wherein the token reference identifier and the identifier for the accepted pre-qualified payment option are provided over a network other than the payment network” which represents an additional function of conducting the transaction and further elaborates on the abstract idea of presenting payment options as noted in claims 1, 8 and 14. Claim 10 further recites previously identified additional element of a payment network. This additional element is being used in its ordinary capacity. The additional elements/functions, alone or in combination, are insufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because the additional elements/functions do not pertain to an improvement to the functioning of a computer or to another technology. The additional elements/functions, alone or in combination, do not offer significantly more than the abstract idea, because the additional elements/functions merely further recite additional instructions to implement the abstract idea on the computer components.
Claim 13 recites: “The method of claim 8, wherein the merchant computer program stores the list of token reference identifiers for payment cards that have been pre-qualified and the one or more pre-qualified installment payment options in a token reference identifier database” which represents an additional function of storing the list of token reference identifiers for payment cards and further elaborates on the abstract idea of presenting payment options as noted in claims 1, 8 and 14. The additional elements/functions, alone or in combination, are insufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because the additional elements/functions do not pertain to an improvement to the functioning of a computer or to another technology. The additional elements/functions, alone or in combination, do not offer significantly more than the abstract idea, because the additional elements/functions merely further recite additional instructions to implement the abstract idea on the computer components.
Claim 18 recites: “The system of claim 14, further comprising a payment network, and the merchant computer program conducts the transaction over the payment network” which represents an additional function of conducting the transaction and further elaborates on the abstract idea of presenting payment options noted in claims 1, 8 and 14. Claim 18 further recites previously identified additional element of a payment network. This additional element is being used in its ordinary capacity. The additional elements/functions, alone or in combination, are insufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because the additional elements/functions do not pertain to an improvement to the functioning of a computer or to another technology. The additional elements/functions, alone or in combination, do not offer significantly more than the abstract idea, because the additional elements/functions merely further recite additional instructions to implement the abstract idea on the computer components.
Claim 19 recites: “The system of claim 18, further comprising a second network, wherein merchant computer program communicates the token reference identifier and the identifier for the accepted pre-qualified payment option to the financial institution backend over the second network” which represents an additional function of communicating the token reference identifier and the identifier for the accepted pre-qualified payment option further elaborates on the abstract idea of presenting payment options as noted in claims 1, 8 and 14. Claim 18 further recites previously identified additional element of a payment network and newly identified additional element of a second network. These additional elements are being used in their ordinary capacity. The additional elements/functions, alone or in combination, are insufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because the additional elements/functions do not pertain to an improvement to the functioning of a computer or to another technology. The additional elements/functions, alone or in combination, do not offer significantly more than the abstract idea, because the additional elements/functions merely further recite additional instructions to implement the abstract idea on the computer components.
Thus, claims 1, 3-14 and 16-20 are not patent-eligible.
Response to Arguments
With respect to Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome this ground of rejection. Accordingly, this ground of rejection is withdrawn.
With respect to Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Applicant’s arguments with respect to 35 USC § 103 rejection are persuasive. Additionally, Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome this ground of rejection. Accordingly, this ground of rejection is withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed on 05/27/2026 have been fully considered, but are not persuasive due to the following reasons:
With respect to Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
Applicant argues: Thus, claim 1 now specifies that the merchant computer program determines whether the token reference identifier is pre- qualified based only a presence of the token reference identifier being on the list of token reference identifiers that have been pre-qualified for one or more of the installment payment options and that this limits a number of times that the merchant computer program communicates with the financial institution computer program. This is because the information needed to make the pre-qualification determination - the list of token reference identifiers that have been pre-qualified - is pre-staged at the merchant before the transaction. Thus, the merchant computer program is able to make the pre-qualification determination on its own, without having to contact the merchant with the token reference identifier. This results in a technical improvement - because the list of token reference identifiers that have been pre-qualified is pre-staged, the number of communications between the merchant computer program and the financial institution is limited. Further, if the financial institution is offline at the time of the transaction, the merchant computer program can still make the pre-qualification determination and present the payment installation option to the customer. Therefore, in view of this technical improvement, the claims recite statutory subject matter, and Applicant respectfully requests that this rejection be withdrawn. See Applicant’s Arguments pages 10-11.
Examiner Response:
The Examiner, however, respectfully disagrees. The reasoning for this rejection is the same as was laid out in the Office Action Final Rejection, dated 04/08/2026 (hereinafter, “Office Action”).
Furthermore, while Applicant has amended the claim to recite additional subject matter, for example, the amended claim limitations recite: “wherein the merchant computer program determines whether the token reference identifier is pre-qualified based only a presence of the token reference identifier being on the list of token reference identifiers that have been pre-qualified for one or more of the installment payment options, thereby limiting a number of times that the merchant computer program communicates with the financial institution computer program” further describe the abstract idea of presenting payment options which is grouped within the “Mental Processes” and “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity”, as indicated above in the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection.
Furthermore, the claims recite “receiving, by a financial institution computer program executed by a financial institution backend, provisioning messages from a payment network identifying payment cards that have been stored or provisioned to customer wallets for a merchant; adding, by the financial institution computer program, the payment cards to a database comprising an identification of a plurality of payment cards that have been stored or provisioned to the customer wallets for the merchant; identifying, in the database maintained by the financial institution, the plurality of payment cards that have been stored in or provisioned to the customer wallets for the merchant; pre-qualifying, by the financial institution computer program, each of the customers associated with the stored or provisioned payment cards for one or more installment payment options for a purchase from the merchant; communicating, by the financial institution computer program, a list of token reference identifiers for stored or provisioned payment cards that have been pre-qualified and the one or more pre-qualified installment payment options to a merchant computer program executed by a merchant backend; receiving, by the merchant computer program, as part of a checkout flow of a checkout user interface, a token reference identifier for a stored or provisioned payment card in one of the customer wallets; determining, by the merchant computer program, that the token reference identifier in the customer wallet is on the list of token reference identifiers that have been pre-qualified for one or more of the installment payment options for the purchase from the merchant, wherein the merchant computer program determines whether the token reference identifier is pre-qualified based only a presence of the token reference identifier being on the list of token reference identifiers that have been pre-qualified for one or more of the installment payment options, thereby limiting a number of times that the merchant computer program communicates with the financial institution computer program; and presenting, by the merchant computer program, the one or more installment payment options associated with the token reference identifier in the customer wallet has been pre-qualified in the checkout flow of the checkout user interface”. These series of steps describe the abstract idea of presenting payment options (with the exception of the italicized terms above), which correspond to “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” and “Mental Processes”. For example, these series of steps can be performed by using a pen and paper and/or that can be performed mentally. The courts consider a mental process (thinking) that "can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper" to be an abstract idea. Additionally, additional elements of claim 1, such as a financial institution backend, payment network, database, merchant backend and checkout user interface, does not necessarily restrict the claim from reciting an abstract idea. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea (See MPEP 2106.04). (Step 2A-Prong 1: YES).
The claims also fail to recite a practical application of the abstract ideas. The additional claim elements are considered when determining whether the claim recites a practical application, such as a technological improvement, of the abstract idea. However, the claims fail to introduce any such additional elements. The additional elements of claim 1, such as a financial institution backend (i.e., a computer. In light of the originally-filed specification [0034]: financial institution backed 110, which may include, for example, servers (e.g., physical and/or cloud-based), computers (e.g., workstations, desktops, laptops,), etc.), payment network, database, merchant backend (i.e., computer. In light of the originally-filed specification [0016]: a merchant backend comprising a merchant backend computer processor) and checkout user interface (e.g., user interface) are no more than simply applying the abstract idea using generic computer elements. Specifically, the financial institution backend, payment network, database, merchant backend and checkout user interface performs the steps or functions of: “receiving, by a financial institution computer program executed by a financial institution backend, provisioning messages from a payment network identifying payment cards that have been stored or provisioned to customer wallets for a merchant; adding, by the financial institution computer program, the payment cards to a database comprising an identification of a plurality of payment cards that have been stored or provisioned to the customer wallets for the merchant; identifying, in the database maintained by the financial institution, the plurality of payment cards that have been stored in or provisioned to the customer wallets for the merchant; pre-qualifying, by the financial institution computer program, each of the customers associated with the stored or provisioned payment cards for one or more installment payment options for a purchase from the merchant; communicating, by the financial institution computer program, a list of token reference identifiers for stored or provisioned payment cards that have been pre-qualified and the one or more pre-qualified installment payment options to a merchant computer program executed by a merchant backend; receiving, by the merchant computer program, as part of a checkout flow of a checkout user interface, a token reference identifier for a stored or provisioned payment card in one of the customer wallets; determining, by the merchant computer program, that the token reference identifier in the customer wallet is on the list of token reference identifiers that have been pre-qualified for one or more of the installment payment options for the purchase from the merchant, wherein the merchant computer program determines whether the token reference identifier is pre-qualified based only a presence of the token reference identifier being on the list of token reference identifiers that have been pre-qualified for one or more of the installment payment options, thereby limiting a number of times that the merchant computer program communicates with the financial institution computer program; and presenting, by the merchant computer program, the one or more installment payment options associated with the token reference identifier in the customer wallet has been pre-qualified in the checkout flow of the checkout user interface”. The additional elements listed above are all recited at a high level of generality and under their broadest reasonable interpretation comprises a generic computing arrangement. The presence of a generic computer arrangement is nothing more than to implement the claimed invention (MPEP 2106.05(f)). Therefore, the recitations of additional elements do not meaningfully apply the abstract idea and hence do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Additionally, with respect to claim language, “thereby limiting a number of times that the merchant computer program communicates with the financial institution computer program”. According to MPEP 2106.05(f)(2): Similarly, "claiming the improved speed or efficiency inherent with applying the abstract idea on a computer" does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide an inventive concept. Thus, claim 1 does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Therefore, this analysis is the same as was laid out in the Office Action. (Step 2A-Prong 2: NO).
The claims also fail to recite significantly more than the abstract idea. The additional elements, when considered individually and as a combination, are analyzed to determine whether the claims recite significantly more than the abstract idea. However, the claims fail to recite any new additional elements. As noted in the Office Action, the additional elements serve to implement the abstract idea in a computing environment. Therefore, the claims limitations do not include additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or that provide significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the claim is not patent eligible. (Step 2B: NO). See detail rejection above.
Accordingly, this ground of rejection is maintained.
Statement Regarding Prior Art for claims 1, 3-14 and 16-20
Regarding claim independent clams 1, 8 and 14: Reference discloses:
[…]
adding, by the financial institution computer program, [the payment cards to the customer wallets for the merchant] (see paragraphs [0019], [0052] and [0054]);
identifying, in the database maintained by the financial institution, the plurality of payment cards that have been stored in or provisioned to the customer wallets for a merchant (see paragraphs [0019], [0024]-[0025]);
[pre-approval], by the financial institution computer program, […] for one or more installment payment options for a purchase from the merchant (see paragraphs [0022] and [0024]-[0025]);
communicating, by the financial institution computer program, [pre-approved installment account] for stored or provisioned payment cards that have been pre-qualified and the one or more pre-qualified installment payment options to a [a wallet provider] (see paragraphs [0024] and [0031]).
[…]
presenting, by the merchant computer program, the one or more installment payment options associated with the token reference identifier in the customer wallet has been pre-qualified in the checkout flow of the checkout user interface (see paragraphs [0031] and [0051]).
However, prior art does not disclose, neither singly nor in combination all of the specific combination of claims limitations which includes:
receiving, by a financial institution computer program executed by a financial institution backend, provisioning messages from a payment network identifying payment cards that have been stored or provisioned to customer wallets for a merchant;
adding, by the financial institution computer program, the payment cards to a database comprising an identification of a plurality of payment cards that have been stored or provisioned to the customer wallets for the merchant;
pre-qualifying, by the financial institution computer program, each of the customers associated with the stored or provisioned payment cards for one or more installment payment options for a purchase from the merchant;
determining, by the merchant computer program, that the token reference identifier in the customer wallet is on the list of token reference identifiers that have been pre-qualified for one or more of the installment payment options for the purchase from the merchant, wherein the merchant computer program determines whether the token reference identifier is pre-qualified based only a presence of the token reference identifier being on the list of token reference identifiers that have been pre-qualified for one or more of the installment payment options, thereby limiting a number of times that the merchant computer program communicates with the financial institution computer program.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure are the following:
Mueller et al. (US 20240202675 A1) discloses, methods receive, via a user interface of a user device, at a hypertext document of a first digital platform of a first entity input(s) to link to a digital program of a second entity, the receiving triggering performing a cross-platform communication event via an API with the digital program of the second entity. A digital display of the digital program of the second digital platform is automatically provided, via the user interface, the providing facilitating data entry to the digital program of the second digital platform. It is determined that a user has completed the data entry to the digital program of the second digital platform, the determining triggering a redirection to the hypertext document of the first digital platform of the first entity, and the hypertext document of the first digital platform of the first entity is displayed, via the user interface.
Aitenbichler et al. (US 20160371716 A1) discloses, a method for redeeming rewards during an offline payment transaction. Once a user reaches a reward threshold, a reward certificate is transmitted to a merchant device by an account system. The user initiates a payment transaction when the devices are without network access to the account system. The user device transmits a withdrawal record, a transaction history, a reward redemption history, and an identification to the merchant device. The merchant device determines whether the user has an available reward, whether additional funds are required to process the offline payment transaction, and whether the user device has a sufficient balance to complete the offline payment transaction. The merchant device prepares a withdrawal record, writes it to the user device, and saves it until the merchant device has network access. When the merchant device has network access, it transmits the withdrawal record and transaction history to the account system.
JONES et al. (US 20230056764 A1) discloses, processes that provision, in real-time, targeted digital content associated with an initiated data exchange based on structured messaging data. For example, an apparatus may receive a message associated with a real-time payment requested from a first counterparty by a second counterparty. The message may include elements of message data disposed within corresponding message fields, and based on at least the elements of message data, the apparatus may generate product data characterizing a product available to the first counterparty and transmit first notification data including digital content associated with the available product and with the data exchange to a first device operable by the first counterparty. Based on response data generated by the first device, the apparatus may perform operations that provision the available product to the first counterparty in accordance with the product data.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAHED ALI whose telephone number is (571)270-1085. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 - 5:00 M-F.
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, Neha Patel can be reached on (571) 270-1492. 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.
/JAHED ALI/
Examiner, Art Unit 3699
Prosecution Insights