Detailed Action
Acknowledgements
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This action is in reply to the Amendment filed on September 12, 2025.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claims 1-20 are examined.
This Office Action is given Paper No. 20251003 for references purposes only.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Step 2A Prong 1: The claims recite an abstract idea of implementing a subscription service on a digital platform, which is a certain method of organizing human activity (e.g. fundamental economic principles or practices including hedging, insurance, mitigating risk; commercial or legal interactions including agreements in the form of contracts, legal obligations, advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors, business relations; managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions).
Claim 1, representative of claims 11 and 20, includes the following limitations:
Receiving a subscription approval signal that is associated with a user account and comprises a monetary value to be automatically transferred on a periodic basis as periodic transactions, wherein there are purchase restrictions other than the periodic transactions;
Determining an amount of virtual currency associated with the monetary value;
Assigning a virtual credit of the amount of virtual currency to the user account;
Receiving a request of a subscription amount that is less than or equal to the virtual credit, wherein the request is for a virtual experience with a developer and wherein the request includes an amount of virtual credit for the experience during a first time period, wherein the request is for editing, adding, or managing subscriptions, wherein the first time period provides a delayed window for virtual currency payouts;
Determining that the user account is granted access to the virtual experience during the first time period, wherein the access is based on subscription data and user data including a time of the request, wherein the request is automatically approved;
Calculating a developer payout in the virtual currency based on the user account being granted access;
Determining that a second time period has ended, which is greater than or equal to the first time period;
Transmitting an electronic payment to a developer account based on the developer payout for the first time period.
Step 2A Prong 2: The claim limitations recite the following additional elements that are beyond the judicial exception:
A virtual experience platform;
A digital distribution platform.
These additional elements are not indicative of integration into a practical application because:
They generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. See MPEP 2106.05(h).
Step 2B: The claim limitations do not recite additional elements, or an ordered combination of additional elements, that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
As discussed with respect to step 2A prong 2 above, the additional elements of “a virtual experience platform” and “a digital distribution platform” generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use, and do not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application at step 2A or provide an inventive concept at step 2B.
According to the 2019 PEG, a conclusion that an additional element is mere instructions to apply an exception under step 2A should be re-evaluated at step 2B. Thus, the additional elements of “a virtual experience platform” and “a digital distribution platform” are re-evaluated to determine whether they constitute significantly more. Examiner finds that the additional elements of “a virtual experience platform” and “a digital distribution platform” are merely an attempt to limit the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. See Ultramercial, Inc. v. Hulu, LLC, 772 F.3d 709, 716 and MPEP 2106.05(h). Additionally, “a virtual experience platform” and “a digital distribution platform” merely limit the claims to the computer field. See FairWarning v. Iatric Sys., 839 F.3d 1089, 1094-95 and MPEP 2106.05(h).
Therefore, when considering all the additional claim elements both individually and as an ordered combination, Examiner finds that the claim does not amount to significantly more than the exception.
The dependent claims fail to cure this deficiency and are rejected accordingly.
Claim 2 recites the first time period is one month and the second time period is greater than one month, which is merely describing data and further defining the abstract idea.
Claim 3 recites the subscription request is determined as valid based on a subscription amount less than or equal to an available amount, which is insignificant extra-solution activity (e.g. selecting a particular data source or type of data to be manipulated). See Electric Power Group, and MPEP 2106.05(g).
Claim 4 recites determining a fixed date has passed, which is insignificant extra-solution activity (e.g. selecting a particular data source or type of data to be manipulated). See Electric Power Group, and MPEP 2106.05(g).
Claim 5 recites the fixed date is at or after one month from the receipt of the signal, which is merely describing data and further defining the abstract idea.
Claim 6 recites the virtual experience request is received at a first date, which is merely describing data and further defining the abstract idea.
Claim 7 recites transmitting the virtual currency payment to the developer account, which is well-understood, routine, and conventional. See Intellectual Ventures v. Symantec, 838 F.3d 1307, 1321 and MPEP 2106.05(d).
Claim 8 recites receiving a second request and adjusting the developer payout, which is insignificant extra-solution activity (e.g. mere data gathering). See CyberSource v. Retail Decisions, Inc., 654 F.3d 1366, 1375, and MPEP 2106.05(g).
Claim 9 recites receiving a cancellation request and adjusting the developer payout, which is insignificant extra-solution activity (e.g. mere data gathering). See OIP Technologies, Inc. v. Amazon, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363.
Claim 10 recites the adjusted payout includes non-cancelled payouts, which is merely describing data and further defining the abstract idea.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Van Luchene (US 2010/0197382) in view of Jung et al. (US 2008/0133392).
Claims 1, 11, 20
Van Luchene discloses:
receiving, at a virtual experience platform (multi player online games, see [0157]), a subscription approval signal (deposit virtual cash or allocate an available credit line, see [0158]) from a digital distribution platform (credit card, see [0162]) that is in operative communication with the virtual experience platform, wherein the subscription approval signal is associated with a user account (player character account, see [0158]) of the virtual experience platform associated with a user ID (player ID, see [0173]) and comprises at least a monetary value (e.g. $15 per month, see [0157]) to be automatically transferred from the digital distribution platform to the virtual experience platform on a periodic basis (e.g. monthly, see [0157]) as periodic transactions, wherein the digital distribution platform (credit card, see [0163]) has restrictions on purchase transactions (e.g. purchase a fixed number or type of virtual assets, loan amount effected by age of character account, see [0163, 0192]) other than the periodic transactions, wherein a user associated with the user ID (player ID, see [0173]) utilizes the user ID to access services (e.g. charge credit card to cover a shortfall, see [0162]) provided by the virtual experience platform on a subscription basis corresponding to the subscription approval signal;
determining an amount of virtual currency (virtual cash, see [0158, 0186]) associated with the monetary value;
assigning a virtual credit (virtual cash, see [0158-0159, 0186]) of the amount of virtual currency to the user account (player account, see [0159]) using the user ID (player ID, see [0173]);
receiving a virtual experience subscription request (request to borrow virtual cash, see [0240]) associated with the user account and of a subscription amount (credit line amount, see [0240]) less than or equal to the virtual credit, wherein the virtual experience subscription request is for one or more virtual experiences hosted on the virtual experience platform, each virtual experience of the one or more virtual experiences associated with a respective developer (e.g. player characters or non-playing third parties, see [0200, 0369, 0385]), and wherein the virtual experience subscription request includes an amount of virtual credit for each of the one or more virtual experiences during a first time period (virtual cash payment schedule, see [0240]), wherein the virtual experience request is to at least one of edit a subscription, add new subscriptions (create new deposit record, see [0186]), or manage subscriptions directly from the virtual experience platform based on the virtual credit, wherein a length of the first time period is fixed as a length to provide a delayed window (deposit time period, see [0178, 0186]) for virtual currency payouts to be calculated such that subscriptions are purchased directly from the virtual credit (from the virtual cash deposits, see [0178]);
determining that the user account is granted access (output a loan offer, see [0240-0241]) to the one or more virtual experiences during the first time period, wherein the access is based on subscription data (e.g. interest rate, see [0241]) and user data (e.g. player character credit score, see [0241]) received from the digital distribution platform allotted to the user ID, including the amount of virtual currency allotted (virtual cash loan amount, see [0241]) to the user ID, wherein the request is approved automatically by the virtual experience platform;
determining that a second time period (maximum time period, see [0163]) has ended, wherein the second time period is greater than or equal to the first time period; and
after determining that the second time period has ended, transmitting an electronic payment (interest payments, see [0205]) in the virtual currency to a developer account (bank account of second character, see claim 1) of the respective developer at the virtual experience platform for each of the one or more virtual experiences, wherein the electronic payment is based on the respective developer payout for the first time period.
Van Luchene does not disclose:
a time… request.
calculating… access.
Jung teaches:
a time (time period, see [0221-0222]) of the virtual experience subscription request (detect user ID is a first-time purchaser, see [0106]).
calculating, for the one or more virtual experiences, a respective developer payout (fees, see [0179-0180) in the virtual currency for the first time period based at least in part on the user account being granted access.
Van Luchene discloses receiving a subscription approval signal, determining an amount of virtual currency, assigning a virtual credit, receiving a request, determining that the user account is granted access, determining that a second period has ended, and transmitting a payment. Van Luchene does not disclose a time of the request and calculating a developer payout, but Jung does. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to combine the methods facilitating the use of financial transactions in a virtual environment of Van Luchene with the time of the request and calculating a developer payout of Jung because 1) a need exists for a virtual bank where players of a video game can deposit virtual cash or allocate an available credit line (see Van Luchene [0158]); and 2) a need exists for creating new and challenging ways for providing participation transactions related to virtual world environments (see Jung [0021]). Determining a time of the request and calculating a developer payout assists in transactions related to virtual world environments.
Claims 2, 12
Furthermore, Van Luchene discloses:
the first time period is one month (monthly, see [0283]), and wherein the second time period is greater than or equal to one month (monthly, see [0283]).
It would have been obvious to have the first time period be one month and the second time period greater than one month because it is obvious to try, choosing from a finite number of identified predicable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success (KSR Rationale E).
Claim 3
Furthermore, Van Luchene discloses:
the determining that the user account is granted access is in response to the subscription request being determined as valid based on the subscription amount (e.g. $14.95 or $16.95 a month, see [0364]) being less than or equal to an available amount of virtual currency in the user account.
Claims 4, 14
Furthermore, Van Luchene discloses:
the determining that the second time period has ended comprises determining that a fixed date (date due, see [0245]) at the end of the first time period has passed.
Claims 5, 15
Furthermore, Van Luchene discloses:
the fixed date occurs at or after one month (monthly, see [0283]) from the receipt of the subscription approval signal.
It would have been obvious to have the fixed date at one month from the receipt of the signal because it is obvious to try, choosing from a finite number of identified predicable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success (KSR Rationale E).
Claims 6, 16
Furthermore, Van Luchene discloses:
the virtual experience subscription request is received at a first date (date secured, see [0215]), and wherein the fixed date (date due, see [0245]) occurs at or after one month from the first date.
It would have been obvious to have the fixed date at one month after the first date because it is obvious to try, choosing from a finite number of identified predicable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success (KSR Rationale E).
Claims 7, 17
Furthermore, Van Luchene discloses:
the transmitting the electronic payment includes sending a virtual currency payment to the developer account (bank account of second character, see claim 1).
Claims 8, 18
Furthermore, Van Luchene discloses:
receiving a second virtual experience subscription request (apply for virtual credit card, see [0383-0384]) associated with the user account, the second virtual experience subscription request being of a second amount (maximum credit line, see [0383]) less than or equal to the virtual credit reduced by the subscription amount, wherein the second virtual experience subscription request is associated with a second virtual experience (virtual credit card, see [0383-0384]) associated with a respective developer; and
adjusting the developer payout (taken from character’s bank account, see [0384]) for the first time period based at least in part on the user account being granted access to other virtual experiences during the first time period, wherein the electronic payment is based on the adjusted developer payout.
Claims 9, 19
Furthermore, Van Luchene discloses:
receiving a cancellation request (notice of cancellation, see [0222]) associated with the user account, the cancellation request being for cancellation to at least one virtual experiences of the one or more virtual experiences during the first time period; and
in response to receiving the cancellation request, adjusting the developer payout (outstanding loans immediately due, see [0222]) for the first time period, wherein the electronic payment is based on the adjusted payout.
Claim 10
Furthermore, Van Luchene discloses:
the adjusted payout includes only non-cancelled virtual experience payouts (outstanding loans due, see [0222]).
Claim 13
Furthermore, Van Luchene discloses:
the determining that the user account is granted access includes accessing a log for a user session (player character log, see [0395]) of the user account that is a subscriber account in the virtual experience platform.
Response to Arguments
101 arguments
First, Applicant argues that the claims are not directed to an abstract idea. Second, Applicant argues that the claims integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because there is greater control and improved safety of transactions. Finally, Applicant argues that the claims recite significantly more because the periodic transactions are managed separately from other transactions, which provides the user with an improved way to mange subscriptions with virtual credit, consolidates transactions, and provides overall efficiency.
Examiner disagrees. First, the claims recite an abstract idea of implementing a subscription service on a digital platform, which is a certain method of organizing human activity (i.e. type of contract regarding periodic transactions). Second, the claims do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Adding restrictions on purchase transactions other than the periodic transactions does not provide greater control or safety of the periodic transactions. Applicant has not claimed any restrictions or explained how they impact the periodic transactions. Finally, the claims do not recite significantly more because Applicant has not shown how the invention improves subscription management. Managing periodic transactions (i.e. subscriptions) is managing a type of transaction. It is unclear how the claims consolidate transactions and provide overall efficiency (e.g. no recitation on quantity of transactions, transaction processing time, etc).
103 arguments
Applicant argues that the prior art does not teach the current amendments.
Examiner has updated the search and re-mapped the limitations. Please see the revised rejection. For example, Jung teaches a time (time period, see [0221-0222]) of the virtual experience subscription request (detect user ID is a first-time purchaser, see [0106]).
Claim Interpretation
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure (see attached form PTO-892).
Shah et al. (US 2021/0049570) discloses a method and system to dynamically route funding to virtual payment cards to resell subscription merchandise.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or concerning this communication or earlier communications from Examiner should be directed to Chrystina Zelaskiewicz whose telephone number is 571-270-3940. Examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, 9:30am-5:00pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s supervisor, Neha Patel can be reached at 571-270-1492.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal/pair <http://pair-direct.uspto.gov>. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866.217.9197 (toll-free).
/CHRYSTINA E ZELASKIEWICZ/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3699
Prosecution Insights