DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, 18/200,549, filed 05/22/2023 is a Continuation of 13/859,841, filed 04/10/2013, which claims priority from US Provisional Application 61/622,490, filed 04/10/2012.
The effective filing date is after the AIA date of March 16, 2013, and so the application is being examined under the “first inventor to file” provisions of the AIA .
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.
Status of the Application
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 01/12/2026 has been entered.
This Non-Final Office Action is in response to Applicant’s Amendment filed on 01/12/2026.
Claims 21, 22, 28, 29, 35, 43, 46, and 49-61 are pending, of which claims 21, 28, and 35 are independent.
In the most recent amendment, claims 21, 28, and 35 have been amended. Claims 26, 27, 33, 34, 39-42, 44, 45, 47, and 48 are newly cancelled, claims 1-20, 23-25, 30-32 and 36-38 were previously cancelled, and new claims 50-61 have been added.
All pending claims have been examined on the merits.
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 21, 22, 28, 29, 35, 43, 46, and 49-61 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea, without “significantly more”.
The abstract idea elements in independent claim 21 are shown in regular font. The “additional elements” are shown in underlined font:
21. (Currently Amended) A system, comprising:
a computing device comprising a processor and a memory; and
machine-readable instructions stored in the memory that, when executed by the processor, cause the computing device to at least:
receive a transfer request comprising instructions to effectuate an immediate electronic wire transfer from a sending account held by a first holder to a receiving account held by a second holder as an immediate electronic intrabank wire transfer, the sending account being hosted by a first server of a first financial institution and the receiving account being hosted by a second server of a second financial institution;
search a database of proxy accounts that are associated with a plurality of financial institution servers to identify a proxy account that is hosted by the second server;
process an intermediary transfer from the sending account to the proxy account; and
initiate an immediate electronic intrabank wire transfer from the proxy account to the receiving account.
More specifically, claims 21, 22, 28, 29, 35, 43, 46, and 49-61 recite an abstract idea: “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity", specifically “Commercial or Legal Interactions (Including Agreements in the form of Contracts; Legal Obligations; Advertising, Marketing, or Sales Activities or Behaviors; Business Relations)”, as discussed in MPEP §2106(a)(2) Parts (I) and (II), and in the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance.
The “Commercial or Legal Interactions” elements include:
“the sending account being hosted by a first server of a first financial institution”.
“the receiving account being hosted by a second server of a second financial institution”.
“process an intermediary transfer from the sending account to the proxy account”.
The “additional elements” are: “a processor”, “a memory”, “a first server of a first financial institution”, and “a second server of a second financial institution”.
The additional “extra-solution activities” are:
“[machine-readable instructions] stored in the memory”.
“receive a transfer request comprising instructions to effectuate an immediate electronic wire transfer from a sending account held by a first holder to a receiving account held by a second holder as an immediate electronic intrabank wire transfer”.
“search a database of proxy accounts that are associated with a plurality of financial institution servers”.
“initiate an immediate electronic intrabank wire transfer from the proxy account to the receiving account”.
This abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application, because:
The claim recites an abstract idea with additional generic computer elements. The generically recited computer elements (“a processor”, “a memory”, “a first server of a first financial institution”, and “a second server of a second financial institution”) do not add a meaningful limitation to the abstract idea, because they amount to simply implementing the abstract idea on a computer. The claim amounts to adding the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the abstract idea, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea.
The extra-solution activities (“[machine-readable instructions] stored in the memory”, “receive a transfer request comprising instructions to effectuate an immediate electronic wire transfer from a sending account held by a first holder to a receiving account held by a second holder as an immediate electronic intrabank wire transfer”, “search a database of proxy accounts that are associated with a plurality of financial institution servers”, and “initiate an immediate electronic intrabank wire transfer from the proxy account to the receiving account”) do not add a meaningful limitation to the method, as they are insignificant extra-solution activity;
The combination of the abstract idea with the additional elements (generically recited computer elements), and/or with the extra-solution activities, does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea, because:
When considering the elements "alone and in combination" (“a processor”, “a memory”, “a first server of a first financial institution”, and “a second server of a second financial institution”), they do not add significantly more (also known as an "inventive concept") to the exception, because they amount to simply implementing the abstract idea on a computer. Instead, they merely add the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the abstract idea, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely use a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea.
In regards to the extra solution activities (“[machine-readable instructions] stored in the memory”, “receive a transfer request comprising instructions to effectuate an immediate electronic wire transfer from a sending account held by a first holder to a receiving account held by a second holder as an immediate electronic intrabank wire transfer”, “search a database of proxy accounts that are associated with a plurality of financial institution servers”, and “initiate an immediate electronic intrabank wire transfer from the proxy account to the receiving account”), are well-understood, routine, conventional computer functions recognized by the court decisions listed in MPEP § 2106.05(d)(II).
More specifically, in regards to the “receive” (“receive a transfer request comprising instructions to effectuate an immediate electronic wire transfer from a sending account held by a first holder to a receiving account held by a second holder as an immediate electronic intrabank wire transfer”) and “transmit” (“initiate an immediate electronic intrabank wire transfer from the proxy account to the receiving account”) steps, see the court cases OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network) and (presenting offers and gathering statistics), OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1362-63, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93; buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network).
Moreover, in regards to the “[machine-readable instructions] stored in the memory” step (which is equivalent to a “storing” step), see the court cases Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (storing and retrieving information in memory); and OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1092-93 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (storing and retrieving information in memory).
Moreover, in regards to the “search a database of proxy accounts that are associated with a plurality of financial institution servers” step, this is a “mere data gathering [step] in conjunction with an … abstract idea”. See CyberSource v. Retail Decisions, Inc., 654 F.3d 1366, 1375, 99 USPQ2d 1690, 1694 (Fed. Cir. 2011) (Holding that a step of obtaining information about credit card transactions so that the information can be analyzed by an abstract mental process is mere data gathering in conjunction with a law of nature or abstract idea) (see MPEP §§ 2106.05(I)(A) and 2106.05(g))
Independent claims 28 and 35 are rejected on the same grounds as independent claim 21, plus also on the grounds that independent claim 28 recites a computer-readable medium, which is merely another generic computer component.
All dependent claims are also rejected, because they merely further define the abstract idea.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 21, 22, 28, 29, 35, 43, 46, and 49-61 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2008/0208693 A1 to Milstein et al. (“Milstein”, Eff. Filed on Feb. 27, 2007. Published on Aug. 28, 2008) in view of US 8,566,168 B1 to Bierbaum et al. (“Bierbaum”, Eff. Filed on Jan. 5, 2012).
In regards to claim 21, Milstein teaches:
21. (Currently Amended) A system, comprising:
a computing device comprising a processor and a memory; and
machine-readable instructions stored in the memory that, when executed by the processor, cause the computing device to at least:
(See Milstein, Figure 1, and para [0005]: “FIG. 1 illustrates a computerized system 100 for facilitating an online purchase between a buyer and a seller, according to one embodiment of the invention. Note that while the buyer, seller, and intermediary can communicate with each other using computers 105, 120, and 110 respectively (as explained in detail below), the buyer, seller, and/or intermediary can also communicate in person (e.g., a buyer can set up an account with the intermediary in person; a buyer can make a purchase from a seller in person; the seller can communicate with the intermediary in person). In addition, note that the term “computer” used in this document can mean any type of device with computer capabilities (e.g., PC, phone, mobile device, PDA, GPS, computer, server, processor, computer system utilizing at least one computer, etc.). Referring to FIG. 1, the buyer can set up an account with an intermediary. In one embodiment, the buyer can utilize a buyer's computer 120, such as a client computer, to set up an account and communicate with an intermediary.”)
receive a transfer request comprising instructions to effectuate an immediate electronic wire transfer from a sending account held by a first holder to a receiving account held by a second holder as an immediate electronic intrabank wire transfer, the sending account being hosted by a first server of a first financial institution and the receiving account being hosted by a second server of a second financial institution;
(See Milstein, Figure 1, and para [0005]: “Referring to FIG. 1, the buyer can set up an account with an intermediary. In one embodiment, the buyer can utilize a buyer's computer 120, such as a client computer, to set up an account and communicate with an intermediary.”)
(See Milstein, Figure 3, and para [0015]: “FIG. 3 illustrates a method 300 of facilitating an online purchase between a buyer and a seller, according to one embodiment of the invention. In 211, in one embodiment, the buyer decides to make a purchase from a seller (e.g., on a seller's website at a seller's computer 105, at a store using a seller's computer 105), and chooses an item(s) and/or service(s) of interest. In 215, in order to provide payment information, the intermediary's computer 110 is accessed (e.g. having the buyer 120 access the intermediary's web page at the intermediary's computer 110 by selecting the intermediary's icon on the seller's website at the seller's computer 105, or having the buyer enter their account identifier in software installed on the seller's website at the seller's computer 105). Note that, in one embodiment, the seller's current payment software (e.g., for a credit card or PAYPAL) can be utilized. In this case, the intermediary would obtain access because the credit card company or PAYPAL could receive the information and forward it to the intermediary (e.g., at the intermediary's computer 110) for payment approval. In one embodiment, password information from the buyer can be entered here, or at any other point in the process.”)
The Examiner interprets that the use of an intrabank wire transfer instead of a credit card (or vice versa) is a difference of intended use for the proxy account.
However, under a conservative interpretation of Milstein, it could be argued that Milstein does not explicitly teach the following features, but Bierbaum does:
search a database of proxy accounts that are associated with a plurality of financial institution servers and identify a proxy account that is hosted by the second server;
(See Bierbaum, col. 5, lines 39-56: “The point-of-sale terminal 122 conducts a near field communication session with the near field communication radio transceiver 110, and the near field communication radio transceiver 110 provides the proxy account number 108 to the point-of-sale terminal 122. The point-of-sale terminal 122 may send a payment transaction request message to a payment mediation service 124 to obtain the payment authorized by the user of the electronic device 102. The payment mediation service 124 may be implemented on a computer system. In some contexts, the payment mediation service 124 may be referred to as a payment mediation server. The payment mediation service 124, based on the format and/or structure of the proxy account number 108, sends the payment transaction request message, possibly reformatted, to the proxy account manager 118. The proxy account manager 118 accesses the proxy account number data store 120 based on the proxy account number 108 to identify all payment accounts associated with the proxy account number 108.”)
(See Bierbaum, col. 6, line 56 to col. 7, line 11: “Turning now to FIG. 3, the proxy account number data store 120 is described. The proxy account manager 118 may create and/or write an entry 130 into the proxy account number data store 120 that associates a proxy account number 108 with a payment account number. For example, a first entry 130 a may associate the first proxy account number 108 a with a first payment account number; a second entry 130 b may associate the first proxy account number 108 a with a second payment account number, a third entry 130 c may associate the first proxy account number 108 a with a third payment account number, a fourth entry 130 d may associate the second proxy account number 108 b with a fourth payment account number, a fifth entry 130 e may associate the second proxy account number 108 b with a fifth payment account number, a sixth entry 130 f may associate the second proxy account number 108 b with the second payment account number, and a seventh entry 130 g may associate the third proxy account number 108 c with a sixth payment account number. Note that the second payment account number is associated with two different proxy account numbers 108: the second payment account number is associated with the first proxy account number 108 a by the second entry 130 b and with the second proxy account number 108 b by the sixth entry 130 f.”)
The Examiner interprets that it is inherent that the proxy account manager 118 manages more than one proxy account, hence the need for a proxy account number 108. See also Figure 3.
process an intermediary transfer from the sending account to the proxy account; and
(Also. see Bierbaum, col. 5, line 46 to col. 6, line 7: “The payment mediation service 124, based on the format and/or structure of the proxy account number 108, sends the payment transaction request message, possibly reformatted, to the proxy account manager 118. The proxy account manager 118 accesses the proxy account number data store 120 based on the proxy account number 108 to identify all payment accounts associated with the proxy account number 108.
The proxy account manager 118 then selects one of these payment accounts to be used to complete the subject payment transaction. The proxy account manager 118 may make this selection decision based on having received a message from the electronic device 102 defining which payment account number to associate to the proxy account number 108. Alternatively, the proxy account manager 118 may apply pre-defined rules to select the payment account number based on contextual information associated with the payment transaction. For example, if the point-of-sale terminal 122 is a gas pump operated by the gasoline retailer associated with the gas credit card of the second payment account, the proxy account manager 118 selects the second payment account number. The proxy account manager 118 sends a message to the payment mediation service 124 comprising the selected payment account number and optionally additional information such as an authorization code or other corroborative or security information.”)
(See Bierbaum, col. 10, lines 16-28: “After the payment mediation service 124 receives the payment message 182, the payment mediation service 124 may send a transaction information message 188 to the proxy account manager 118. The transaction information message 188 may indicate the amount of the payment that was made, the identity of the point-of-sale terminal 122, the product or service that was paid for, and other information about the transaction. The proxy account manager 118 may store this information in a transaction data store as an entry that identifies the proxy account number, the payment account number 108, the payment amount, the identity of the point-of-sale terminal 122, the product or service paid for, and other information. In an embodiment, the information stored in the entry in the transaction data store may be aggregated by the proxy account manager 118 based on information collected by the proxy account manager 118 from the proxy account number message 176 and from the transaction information message 188. For example, in an embodiment, a transaction identity may be associated with the total transaction represented in the message sequence 170, and the proxy account manager 118 may be able to associate and aggregate the information about the transaction using the transaction identity as a unifying handle.”)
initiate an immediate electronic intrabank wire transfer from the proxy account to the receiving account.
(See Bierbaum, col. 6, lines 8-15: “The payment mediation service 124 may handshake with a financial institution 126, for example an issuer of a gas credit card, selected based on the selected payment account number. The financial institution 126 may be implemented by a computer system. The payment transaction is completed, possibly electronically transferring money to an account associated with the point-of-sale terminal 122 or queuing a payment transaction for later settlement.”)
The Examiner interprets that the use of an intrabank wire transfer instead of a credit card (or vice versa) is a difference of intended use for the proxy account.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA), at the effective filing date of the Application, to include in the “method and system of facilitating a purchase between a buyer and a seller”, as taught by Milstein, with “Electronic payment using a proxy account number stored in a secure element”, as further taught by Bierbaum, because while Milstein discloses the use of a “proxy intermediary” in Milstein, para. [0007] and Fig.4, Milstein does not disclose details regarding how the “proxy intermediary” is made and/or used, which Bierbaum does disclose, for example in Bierbaum’s Figure 3.
In regards to claim 22,
22. (Previously Presented) The system of claim 21, wherein the machine-readable instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the computing device to at least send a notification to a client device of a proxy holder, the proxy account being held by the proxy holder and the notification indicating that an intrabank transfer from the proxy account has occurred on behalf of the first holder.
(See Bierbaum, col. 10, lines 10-23: “Alternatively, the user of the electronic device 102 may work with a customer care representative who enters the desired pre-defined rules into the proxy account manager 118 and/or the proxy account number data store 120 on behalf of the user of the electronic device 102.
After the payment mediation service 124 receives the payment message 182, the payment mediation service 124 may send a transaction information message 188 to the proxy account manager 118. The transaction information message 188 may indicate the amount of the payment that was made, the identity of the point-of-sale terminal 122, the product or service that was paid for, and other information about the transaction.”)
In regards to claims 23-27, they have been cancelled.
In regards to claim 28, it is rejected on the same grounds as claim 21.
In regards to claim 29, it is rejected on the same grounds as claim 22.
In regards to claims 30-34, they have been cancelled.
In regards to claim 35, it is rejected on the same grounds as claim 21.
In regards to claims 36-42, they have been cancelled.
In regards to claim 43,
43. (Previously Presented) The system of claim 21, wherein the immediate electronic wire transfer from the sending account held by the first holder and hosted by the first server of the first financial institution to the receiving account held by the second holder and hosted by the second server of the second financial institution is completed in one business day.
(See Bierbaum, col. 6, lines 8-21: “The payment mediation service 124 may handshake with a financial institution 126, for example an issuer of a gas credit card, selected based on the selected payment account number. The financial institution 126 may be implemented by a computer system. The payment transaction is completed, possibly electronically transferring money to an account associated with the point-of-sale terminal 122 or queuing a payment transaction for later settlement.
A confirmation of the completion of the payment transaction may be returned to the point-of-sale terminal 122. The point-of-sale terminal 122 may notify a clerk that the payment transaction has been successfully completed or display a message to this effect for viewing by the user of the electronic device 102.”)
The Examiner holds the “confirmation of the completion of the payment transaction” is “returned to the point-of-sale terminal 122” within one day, as is the notification “to a clerk that the payment transaction has been successfully completed.”
In regards to claim 44 and 45, they have been cancelled.
In regards to claim 46, it is rejected on the same grounds as claim 43.
In regards to claim 47 and 48, they have been cancelled.
In regards to claim 49, it is rejected on the same grounds as claim 43.
In regards to claim 50,
50. (New) The system of claim 21, wherein the intermediary transfer from the sending account to the proxy account comprises:
a first intermediary transfer from the sending account to an intermediary account;
and
a second intermediary transfer from the intermediary account to the proxy account.
(Also. see Bierbaum, col. 5, line 46 to col. 6, line 7: “The payment mediation service 124, based on the format and/or structure of the proxy account number 108, sends the payment transaction request message, possibly reformatted, to the proxy account manager 118. The proxy account manager 118 accesses the proxy account number data store 120 based on the proxy account number 108 to identify all payment accounts associated with the proxy account number 108.
The proxy account manager 118 then selects one of these payment accounts to be used to complete the subject payment transaction. The proxy account manager 118 may make this selection decision based on having received a message from the electronic device 102 defining which payment account number to associate to the proxy account number 108. Alternatively, the proxy account manager 118 may apply pre-defined rules to select the payment account number based on contextual information associated with the payment transaction. For example, if the point-of-sale terminal 122 is a gas pump operated by the gasoline retailer associated with the gas credit card of the second payment account, the proxy account manager 118 selects the second payment account number. The proxy account manager 118 sends a message to the payment mediation service 124 comprising the selected payment account number and optionally additional information such as an authorization code or other corroborative or security information.”)
In regards to claim 51,
51. (New) The system of claim 50, wherein the first intermediary transfer is executed in response to receiving the transfer request and the second intermediary transfer is executed in response to completion of the immediate electronic intrabank wire transfer from the proxy account to the receiving account.
(Also. see Bierbaum, col. 5, line 46 to col. 6, line 7: “The payment mediation service 124, based on the format and/or structure of the proxy account number 108, sends the payment transaction request message, possibly reformatted, to the proxy account manager 118. The proxy account manager 118 accesses the proxy account number data store 120 based on the proxy account number 108 to identify all payment accounts associated with the proxy account number 108.
The proxy account manager 118 then selects one of these payment accounts to be used to complete the subject payment transaction. The proxy account manager 118 may make this selection decision based on having received a message from the electronic device 102 defining which payment account number to associate to the proxy account number 108. Alternatively, the proxy account manager 118 may apply pre-defined rules to select the payment account number based on contextual information associated with the payment transaction. For example, if the point-of-sale terminal 122 is a gas pump operated by the gasoline retailer associated with the gas credit card of the second payment account, the proxy account manager 118 selects the second payment account number. The proxy account manager 118 sends a message to the payment mediation service 124 comprising the selected payment account number and optionally additional information such as an authorization code or other corroborative or security information.”)
The Examiner interprets that the use of an intrabank wire transfer instead of a credit card (or vice versa) is a difference of intended use for the proxy account.
In regards to claim 52,
52. (New) The system of claim 21, wherein the machine-readable instructions further cause the computing device to at least receive one or more inputs obtained through a set of input fields displayed within a graphical user interface presented by a client device on a display of the client device,
(See Bierbaum, col. 10, lines 53 to col. 11, line 15: “FIG. 6 depicts the mobile device 400, which is operable for implementing aspects of the present disclosure, but the present disclosure should not be limited to these implementations. For example, in an embodiment, the electronic device 102 described above with reference to FIG. 1 may be implemented in a form substantially similar to the mobile device 400. Though illustrated as a mobile phone, the mobile device 400 may take various forms including a wireless handset, a pager, a personal digital assistant (PDA), a gaming device, or a media player. The mobile device 400 includes a display 402 and a touch-sensitive surface and/or keys 404 for input by a user. The mobile device 400 may present options for the user to select, controls for the user to actuate, and/or cursors or other indicators for the user to direct. The mobile device 400 may further accept data entry from the user, including numbers to dial or various parameter values for configuring the operation of the handset. The mobile device 400 may further execute one or more software or firmware applications in response to user commands. These applications may configure the mobile device 400 to perform various customized functions in response to user interaction. Additionally, the mobile device 400 may be programmed and/or configured over-the-air, for example from a wireless base station, a wireless access point, or a peer mobile device 400. The mobile device 400 may execute a web browser application which enables the display 402 to show a web page. The web page may be obtained via wireless communications with a base transceiver station, a wireless network access node, a peer mobile device 400 or any other wireless communication network or system.”)
(See Bierbaum, col. 12, lines 4-13: “The keypad 528 couples to the DSP 502 via the interface 518 to provide one mechanism for the user to make selections, enter information, and otherwise provide input to the mobile device 400. Another input mechanism may be the touch screen LCD 530, which may also display text and/or graphics to the user. The touch screen LCD controller 532 couples the DSP 502 to the touch screen LCD 530. The GPS receiver 538 is coupled to the DSP 502 to decode global positioning system signals, thereby enabling the mobile device 400 to determine its position.”)
wherein the one or more inputs are included in the transfer request.
The Examiner interprets that this is an obvious intended use of the disclosed keyboard and web browser application.
In regards to claim 53,
53. (New) The system of claim 21, wherein the machine-readable instructions that cause the computing device to initiate the immediate electronic intrabank transfer from the proxy account to the receiving account further cause the computing device to at least log into the proxy account on behalf of a proxy using credentials stored in the database of proxy accounts.
(Also. see Bierbaum, col. 5, line 46 to col. 6, line 7: “The payment mediation service 124, based on the format and/or structure of the proxy account number 108, sends the payment transaction request message, possibly reformatted, to the proxy account manager 118. The proxy account manager 118 accesses the proxy account number data store 120 based on the proxy account number 108 to identify all payment accounts associated with the proxy account number 108.
The proxy account manager 118 then selects one of these payment accounts to be used to complete the subject payment transaction. The proxy account manager 118 may make this selection decision based on having received a message from the electronic device 102 defining which payment account number to associate to the proxy account number 108. Alternatively, the proxy account manager 118 may apply pre-defined rules to select the payment account number based on contextual information associated with the payment transaction. For example, if the point-of-sale terminal 122 is a gas pump operated by the gasoline retailer associated with the gas credit card of the second payment account, the proxy account manager 118 selects the second payment account number. The proxy account manager 118 sends a message to the payment mediation service 124 comprising the selected payment account number and optionally additional information such as an authorization code or other corroborative or security information.”)
In regards to claim 54, it is rejected on the same grounds as claim 50.
In regards to claim 55, it is rejected on the same grounds as claim 51.
In regards to claim 56, it is rejected on the same grounds as claim 52.
In regards to claim 57, it is rejected on the same grounds as claim 53.
In regards to claim 58, it is rejected on the same grounds as claim 50.
In regards to claim 59, it is rejected on the same grounds as claim 51.
In regards to claim 60, it is rejected on the same grounds as claim 52.
In regards to claim 61, it is rejected on the same grounds as claim 53.
Response to Amendments
Re: Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
In regards to the 35 USC § 101 rejection, it has been amended in response to Applicant’s amendments to the independent claims.
Re: Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In regards to the 35 USC § 103 rejection, it has been amended in response to Applicant’s amendments to the independent claims.
Conclusion
Applicants are invited to contact the Office to schedule an in-person interview to discuss and resolve the issues set forth in this Office Action. Although an interview is not required, the Office believes that an interview can be of use to resolve any issues related to a patent application in an efficient and prompt manner.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications should be directed to Examiner Ayal Sharon, whose telephone number is (571) 272-5614, and fax number is (571) 273-1794. The Examiner can normally be reached from Monday to Friday between 9 AM and 6 PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Christine M Behncke can be reached on (571) 272-8103. The fax 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.
Sincerely,
/Ayal I. Sharon/
Examiner, Art Unit 3695
March 24, 2026