Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/197,873

TOOLS FOR PURCHASING TRANSACTIONS

Non-Final OA §101
Filed
May 16, 2023
Examiner
PROIOS, GEORGE N
Art Unit
3694
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Affirm, Inc.
OA Round
5 (Non-Final)
55%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 55% of resolved cases
55%
Career Allow Rate
99 granted / 180 resolved
+3.0% vs TC avg
Strong +36% interview lift
Without
With
+36.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
214
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
46.9%
+6.9% vs TC avg
§103
29.1%
-10.9% vs TC avg
§102
5.4%
-34.6% vs TC avg
§112
12.2%
-27.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 180 resolved cases

Office Action

§101
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 on February 18, 2026. 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR § 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.114.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 February 18, 2026 has been entered. Status of the Application This office action is prepared in response to claim amendments and Remarks submitted by Applicant on February 18, 2026 relating to U.S. Patent Application No. 18/197,873, filed on May 16, 2023. This application is a continuation of U.S. Patent Application 14/712,790, filed on May 14, 2015, now U.S. Patent 11,710,179, which claims priority to U.S. Provisional Application 61/992,984, filed on May 14, 2014 and U.S. Provisional Application 62/048,186, filed on September 9, 2014. None of the previously presented claims have been amended. Claims 41 and 42 have been added. Claims 21-28, 30-38 and 40-42 are pending and have been examined. This action is non-final. Response to Arguments The Remarks submitted by Applicant on February 18, 2026, have been fully considered, however, are not persuasive. With respect to the Section 112(a) rejection, Applicant has highlighted areas in the disclosure supporting the elements of independent Claims 21 and 31 and asserts that there is sufficient disclosure presented to satisfy the written description requirement. With respect to the third message, Applicant asserts that although the third message including the validation code may not be specifically shown in any figure of the '873 application, it is referred to explicitly at least at page 26, lines 15-17, which specifically states that "the customer can input the verification code that was received by the customer's mobile phone” which supports the existence and content of a third message. (Remarks, pp. 8-9). Applicant’s argument is persuasive. The Section 112(a) rejection is withdrawn. With respect to the Section 101 rejection, Applicant has submitted the Declaration of David Whitmire, dated 17 February 2026, (“Whitmire Declaration “), in support of subject matter eligibility of the instant claims. (Remarks, pp. 9-10). Applicant, citing to the Whitmire Declaration, asserts that the claimed invention integrates the abstract idea into a practical application in that the steps do more than merely “apply it” in relation to the integration of the computer components into the defined solution and provide significantly more than the abstract idea. (Remarks, pp. 9-10). The Whitmire Declaration asserts that although the individual steps may be argued to each be unremarkable in their own right, the combination of operations balances simplicity and security (Remarks, p. 9) and solves a problem that it seems the inventors aimed at solving of balancing the provision of adequate security with the psychological advantage of providing an interface that feels simple to the user. (Whitmire Declaration, Par. 9, p. 6). Examiner respectfully disagrees. The additional elements in the claims are used as tools to implement the abstract idea. Applicant has not cited to any support from the Specification supporting a technical solution to a technical problem. The claims do not provide improvements to the functioning of a computer or to technology. They do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or provide significantly more. (See Section 101 rejection below). The Section101 rejection is maintained. Claim Rejection - 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 21-28, 30-38 and 40-42 are rejected pursuant to 35 USC § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Step 1 - Statutory Class Claims 21-28, 30 and 41 are directed to a method. Claims 31-38, 40 and 42 are directed to a server. Therefore, on its face, each of Claims 21-28, 30-38 and 40-42 is directed to a statutory class of invention. Step 2A, Prong 1 – Abstract Idea Claim 31 recites conducting a transaction between a customer and a merchant by a financial provider: receive, from a customer a request for financing to conduct the transaction; collect customer data from the customer responsive to the indication of the request; collect merchant data from the merchant responsive to the indication of the request; collect financial provider data including detailed information regarding the transaction from the financial provider responsive to the indication of the request; perform a credit decision based on the customer data, the merchant data and the financial provider data; responsive to approval of the request, generate a first message to the customer requesting a mobile number of the customer and information for verifying an identity of the customer, generating a second message the customer responsive to verification of the identity of the customer to indicate the approval of the request and provide an indication that a third message will be sent and generating the third message including a validation code and a value card to support conducting the transaction and providing information associated with the value card to the merchant in response to receipt of the validation code from the customer to facilitate completion of the transaction. The abstract idea recited in Claim 31 recites conducting a transaction between a customer and a merchant by a financial provider by receiving customer data, merchant data and financial provider data, performing a credit decision and responsive to approval, providing the customer a value card to complete the transaction which involves commercial interactions including agreements, legal obligations and business relations falling under Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity enumerated in MPEP 2106.04(a). Claim 21 recites the same abstract idea. Step 2A, Prong 2 – Practical Application Claim 31 recites a server comprising processing circuitry. Also recited, but not claimed, are a processor, a merchant device, a customer device, a merchant website, a device of a financial provider, a checkout system and a control console of the merchant website. The additional elements are recited at a high level of generality and are used as tools to implement the abstract idea. They do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. They do not provide improvements to the functioning of a computer or to technology because they only manipulate financial data associated with an individual. The claims do not invoke a particular machine as our guidance is clear that a generic computer is not the particular machine envisioned, they do not transform matter as they only manipulate data which is not matter. Step 2B – Significantly more As set forth in the discussion in Step 2A, Prong 2, above, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality and are used as tools and instructions to implement the abstract idea. They do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or add significantly more to the abstract idea. Dependent claims Claims 22 and 32 (collecting customer data is performed in response to generating instructions for display of financial terms and repayment information associated with a financial instrument associated with the value card and receiving acceptance of the financial terms from the customer device), Claims 23 and 33 (collecting customer data is performed prior to generating instructions for display of financial terms and repayment information associated with a financial instrument associated with the value card and receiving acceptance of the financial terms from the customer device), Claims 24 and 34 (generating the value card comprises generating a prepaid debit card number with expiration date and card verification value (CVV) for provision to the merchant website), Claims 25 and 35 (the prepaid debit card number is issued for an exact amount of the transaction), Claims 26 and 36 (the prepaid debit card number includes an expiry period of minutes or hours), Claims 27 and 37 (the prepaid debit card number includes an expiry period of days or weeks), Claims 28 and 38 (the prepaid debit card number is stored at a database of the merchant for future use within a predetermined period of time), Claims 30 and 40 (the value card is a virtual debit card) and Claims 41 and 42 (generating the first message includes providing an entry box into which the information for verifying the identity of the customer is entered, the entry box soliciting entry of a birthdate of the customer or a last four digits of a social security number of the customer) further define and merely add specificity to the abstract idea. The dependent claims fail to add significantly more to the abstract idea. As such, Claims 21-28, 30-38 and 40-42 are not patent eligible. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GEORGE PROIOS whose telephone number is (571)272-4573. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5. 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. /GEORGE N. PROIOS/Examiner, Art Unit 3694 /BENNETT M SIGMOND/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3694
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 16, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 30, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §101
Dec 17, 2024
Response Filed
Feb 13, 2025
Final Rejection — §101
May 19, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
May 21, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 02, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §101
Aug 15, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Aug 15, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Sep 04, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 15, 2025
Final Rejection — §101
Feb 18, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 18, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 06, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 17, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §101 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602692
Systems And Methods For Decreasing Counterparty Settlement Risk
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12579410
TECHNIQUES FOR DATA PROCESSING PREDICTIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12561691
DEVICE SUPPORTING FINANCIAL SERVICES, AND INTEGRATED SYSTEM THEREFOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12548034
GLOBAL LAYER 1 PROGRAMMABLE LEDGERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12549369
ESTABLISHING A CONTINGENT ACTION TOKEN
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
55%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+36.1%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 180 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

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

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

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month