DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/22/2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Status of the claims
3. Applicant filed the amendment on 09/26/2025. Claims 1 and 10 are amended. Claims 1-17, 23-26 are pending.
Claim Interpretation
Intended Use
4. Intended use language is generally not given patentable weight. See MPEP 2114(II) ("A claim containing a 'recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus’ if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987).”); see also MPEP 2103(C). Examples of claim limitations that are often found to precede intended use include “adapted to,” “capable of,” “sufficient to,” “whereby,” and “for.”
5. Claim 1 recites “validating the payment transaction data to verify the payer …”, “validating the payment transaction data to verify the payer …”, and “communicating …to cause a deduction…”.
Claim 4 recites “sending … to cause a deduction…”, and “sending … to cause an addition…”.
Claim 5 recites “sending a credit … to cause an addition …”.
Claim 8 recites “validating … to verify the payer communication …”, “upon successful … causing the digital payment to be settled online …”, and “communicating …to cause a deduction…”.
Claim 10 recites “update the balance … to reflect the payment amount …”.
Claim 11 recites “upon successful … update the balance … to reflect the granted …”.
Claim 13 recites “use … for verifying that the current balance …” and “use … for updating the balance …”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
6. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
7. Claims 1-17 and 23-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Unclear scope
8. “An essential purpose of patent examination is to fashion claims that are precise, clear, correct, and unambiguous. Only in this way can uncertainties of claim scope be removed, as much as possible, during the administrative process.” Zletz, 893 F.2d at 322, 13 USPQ2d at 1322.
9. Claim 1 recites “upon successful validation, accepting the digital payment and buffering the payment transaction data in local storage, the digital payment thereby being settled offline between the payer and payee” and subsequently “upon successful validation, causing the digital payment to be settled online between the payer and payee …”.
Therefore, it is not clear why the digital payment between the payer and payee should be settled online if it is already has being settled offline.
10. If the language of the claim is such that a person of ordinary skill in the art could not interpret the metes and bounds of the claim so as to understand how to avoid infringement, a rejection of the claim under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, is appropriate. See IBSA Institut Biochimique, S.A. v. Teva Pharm. USA, Inc., 966 F.3d 1374, 1378-81, 2020 USPQ2d 10865 (Fed. Cir. 2020) (The court affirmed a district court’s finding of indefiniteness based upon a detailed analysis of the claim language itself as well as intrinsic and extrinsic evidence); Morton Int’l, Inc. v. Cardinal Chem. Co., 5 F.3d 1464, 1470, 28 USPQ2d 1190, 1195 (Fed. Cir. 1993), MPEP 2173.02 (II).
11. Claims 2-17 and 23-26 are rejected under the same rationale as claim 1 because claims 2-17 and 23-26 inherit the deficiencies of claim 1 due to their dependency.
Response to Arguments
Claim Rejections - 35 USC §112(a)
12. Applicant arguments towards rejections under “Lack of Algorithm” are persuasive, rejections are withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC §112(b)
13. Applicant arguments towards rejections of claim 1 under of “Relative Term” and “Unclear Scope” are persuasive, rejections are withdrawn.
Claim 10 rejection under “Unclear Scope” is withdrawn due to amendment of claim.
Conclusion
14. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US20150052064A1 – Karpenko et al. – Discloses an electronic device having the secure-element identifier, the certificate associated with the provider of the secure element, and the digital signature.
US6327578B1- Linehan – Discloses a method for doing business for electronic commerce that expands the role of a consumer's wallet by providing issuers with an active role in each payment.
US20140330721A1 – Wang – Discloses a payment processing system for providing a standardized and more efficient virtual currency that can provide easier tracking of and use of a consumer's virtual currency balance.
US20180103038A1 – Burke et al. – Discloses a method for receiving, at a server computer, from a client computer operated by an administrator, credential data of the administrator, the administrator corresponding to a merchant.
US20230108839A1 – Bhasin et al. – Discloses a method, system, and computer program product for revocable peer-to-peer payments, wherein generating an asymmetric key pair comprising a first key and a second key, encrypting at least a portion of the peer-to-peer payment data with the first key to generate encrypted payment data, storing the encrypted payment data.
US20220156742A1 – Gupta – Discloses a method, system, and computer program product for authorizing a transaction, wherein registering, with a first merchant system associated with a first merchant, a second merchant system associated with a second merchant, receiving, from the second merchant system, user data associated with a user requesting a transaction through the second merchant system.
15. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
16. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMANULLA ABDULLAEV whose telephone number is (571)272-4367. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30AM -4:30PM ET.
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, Ryan D 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.
/AMANULLA ABDULLAEV/Examiner, Art Unit 3692
/KAMBIZ ABDI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3685
Prosecution Insights