DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
Applicant has amended claims 1, 8, 15 and 22. No claims have been added or canceled. Claims 4, 5, 11, 12, 17 and 18 were canceled prior to previous office action.. Thus, claims 1-3, 6-10, 13-16 and 19-22 remain pending in this application. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments and amendments filed on 05 May 2026 with respect to:
objection to specification,
objection to claims 1-3, 6-10, 13-16 and 19-22,
rejections of claims 1, 8 and 15 under U.S.C. § 112(a),
rejections of claims 1-3, 6-10, 13-16 and 19-22 under U.S.C. § 112(b),
have been fully considered. Amendments to claims have been entered.
Examiner acknowledges amendments to claims to overcome claim objections and 35 U.S.C. § 112(a) and 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) rejections and, in turn, withdraws objections and rejections. However, new rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103 have been cited.
Priority
This application filed on 07 September 2023 is given priority from 07 September 2023.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 8 and 15 are objected to because the term “deficient” as in the limitation:
cause a prompt to be sent to the end-point device associated with the user upon determining that the detailed data transfer record is deficient, wherein the prompt is a request to provide information to create or update the detailed data transfer record for the resource transfer;
is not clear as to its meaning. Examiner suggests adding subject matter from [0072] of Applicant’s specification such as “the data transfer does not match the data transfer value” or “one or more transfer items are not included in the detailed data transfer record” to clarify the term “deficient”.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Claims 1, 8 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tang et al (US Pub. No. 20150143116 A1) in view of Aery et al (US Patent No. 12,314,931 B1).
Regarding claims 1, 8 and 15, Tang teaches systems and methods for conducting convenient and secure mobile transactions between a payment terminal and a mobile device [0006]. He teaches:
at least one non-transitory storage device containing instructions – [0007] and [0008]; and
at least one processing device coupled to the at least one non-transitory storage device, wherein the at least one processing device - [0007] and [0008], upon execution of the instructions, is configured to:
receive a data transfer request for a data transfer associated with a user –[0007], [0009] and [0061];
authenticate an end-point device associated with the user using an authentication subsystem – [0006]-[0009], [0022], [0030] and [0031];
receive a resource transfer request for a transfer associated with a user via a payment network - [0007];
cause an execution of the resource transfer associated with the user, and a receiving user – [0008];
receive a detailed data transfer record associated with the resource transfer comprising data associated with an “itemized” receipt of the resource transfer – [0038] “a printed or electronic receipt”;
in response to receiving the detailed data transfer record, determine that the detailed data transfer record is deficient – [0062] “configured to prompt the user for any additional information that is required to confirm that the user is an authorized user or to complete the transaction”;
cause a prompt to be sent to the end-point device associated with the user upon determining that the detailed data transfer record is deficient, wherein the prompt is a request to provide information to create or update the detailed data transfer record for the resource transfer - [0062];
receive a user input with information relating to the resource transfer and update the detailed data transfer record based on the user input – [0062]; and
cause a rendering of a user interface to the end-point device associated with the user configured to display the combined data transfer record, - [0009] , [0051] and [0077].
Tang does not explicitly disclose:
the resource transfer comprising data indicating a resource transfer amount, a receiving user, and a resource transfer timestamp;
the resource transfer comprising data associated with an “itemized” receipt; and
generate a combined data transfer record based on the detailed data transfer record and the executed data transfer record on a digital ledger that includes information relating to the resource transfer; and
cause a rendering of a user interface to the end-point device associated with the user configured to display the combined data transfer record, wherein the user interface comprises an interactive account report comprising one or more snapshots of the combined data transfer record of the resource transfer.
However, Aery teaches a method of providing a management system for digital platforms in a computing environment [col. 1 lines 39-56]. The method includes providing a management graphical user interface (GUI) to a user device in response to a login using the master login credentials; creating a subordinate account in response to a first user selection via the management GUI, the subordinate account having subordinate login credentials associated therewith; establishing one or more funding rules for the subordinate account; establishing one or more spending rules for the subordinate account; and, providing a dashboard via the management GUI, the dashboard comprising a ledger of transactions, the ledger of transactions comprising a first purchase (IAP) [Id.]. He teaches a customer device displaying a management GUI dashboard which includes an itemized ledger of each transaction in the sub account [col. 16 lines 18-25]. He teaches the dashboard displaying a graphical indicator of the available balance, and a selectable icons to see the transaction history in the form of a ledger [col. 17 line 3-12]. He teaches the payment message indicating to the management platform a transaction amount, an identity of the digital provider (e.g., the merchant), and/or other information such as time stamps [col. 20 lines 41-60].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Tang’s disclosure to include a GUI displaying an itemized ledger of each transaction including time stamps as taught by Aery it is useful in preventing unauthorized transactions to be made from an authorized user of a digital platform - Aery [col. 1 lines 24-35].
Regarding claims 6, 13 and 19, Tang teaches generating an account report associated with the user, wherein the account report comprises the combined data transfer record and one or more additional combined data transfer records associated with one or more additional resource transfers associated with the user - [0038] “a printed or electronic receipt”.
Regarding claims 7, 14 and 20, Tang teaches the combined data transfer record being generated based on a similarity between the executed data transfer record and the detailed data transfer record – [0038] “a printed or electronic receipt”, and [0068].
Regarding claim 16, Tang teaches the resource transfer request as comprising a resource transfer identifier for the resource transfer, wherein each of the executed data transfer record and the detailed data transfer record further comprises the resource transfer identifier, and wherein the detailed data transfer record and the executed data transfer record are associated based on the resource transfer identifier – [0068].
Regarding claim 21, Tang teaches the combined data transfer record as comprising data from the detailed data transfer record and the executed data transfer record – [0068].
Regarding claim 22, Tang teaches determining that the detailed data transfer record being deficient as comprising determining that one or more transfer items are missing from the detailed data transfer record or the resource transfer does not match a resource transfer amount - [0062].
Claims 2, 3, 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tang in view of Aery, in further view of Whiteley et al (US Patent No. 11,580,514 B1).
Regarding claims 2 and 9, neither Tang nor Aery explicitly discloses the resource transfer request as comprising a resource transfer identifier for the resource transfer – [0032] and [0033].
However, Whiteley teaches improvements to existing technologies associated with point-of-sale transactions and merchant ecosystems to, among other things, reduce in-person contact and, in some examples, improve the efficiency at which point-of-sale transactions [col. 2 lines 44-50]. He teaches transaction data as including data structures representing previous transactions, transactions that are in progress, or transactions that are upcoming [col. 9 lines 21-33]. In some examples, a data structure can include a merchant identifier, a customer identifier, a transaction identifier, a date associated with a transaction, a time associated with a transaction, item(s) associated with the transaction, fulfillment status of item(s) associated with the transaction [Id.]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Tang’s disclosure to include transaction identifiers associated with transactions as taught by Whiteley since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claims 3 and 10, neither Tang nor Aery explicitly discloses each of the executed data transfer record and the detailed data transfer record as further comprising the resource transfer identifier, and the detailed data transfer record and the executed data transfer record being associated based on the resource transfer identifier.
However, Whiteley teaches transaction data as including data structures representing previous transactions, transactions that are in progress, or transactions that are upcoming In some examples, a data structure can include a merchant identifier, a customer identifier, a transaction identifier, a date associated with a transaction, a time associated with a transaction, item(s) associated with the transaction, fulfillment status of item(s) associated with the transaction [col. 9 lines 21-33].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Tang’s disclosure to include merchant identifiers, customer identifiers and transaction identifiers associated with transactions as taught by Whiteley since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Conclusion
The prior art of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure:
Vu et al: “DYNAMIC USER INTERFACES AND OPERATIONAL FLOWS”, (US Pub. No. 20240378586 A1).
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 concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDWARD J BAIRD whose telephone number is (571)270-3330. The examiner can normally be reached 7 am to 3:30 pm 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 Applicant wishes to correspond to the Examiner via email, Applicant needs to file an AUTHORIZATION FOR INTERNET COMMUNICATIONS IN A PATENT APPLICATION form. The form may be downloaded at:
https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/sb0439.pdf
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ryan Donlon can be reached at 571-270-3602. 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.
/EDWARD J BAIRD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3692
Prosecution Insights