DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, 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.
This action is in reply to the response and/or arguments filed for Application 18/283,954 filed on 4 December 2025.
Claims 2-3 and 11-19 have been previously canceled.
Claims 20-24 have been added.
Claim 6 has been amended
Claims 1, 4, 5, 7, 8-10 have been withdrawn/not elected.
Claims 6 and 20-24 currently pending and has been examined.
Response to Arguments
A. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103:
Claim 6 stands rejected under U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bhargava et al., US 12,289,156 B2 (“Bhargava”), in view of Dunne, US 2018/0068293 A1 (“Dunne”).
The Office has given consideration to the remarks and amendments made to the pending set of claims, but are considered moot in light of the grounds of rejection, provided below, for the current listing of claims.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 103
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 may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 6 and 20-24 are rejected under U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bhargava et al., US 12,289,156 B2 (“Bhargava”), in view of Zalewski et al., US 9,888,337 B1 (“Zalewski”), in view of Dunne, US 2018/0068293 A1 (“Dunne”).
Re Claim 1-5: (Cancelled)
Re Claim 6: (Currently amended) Bhargava discloses a payments system, comprising
wireless devices including a first wireless device and a second wireless device, each wireless device including a respective downloaded custom software application, (C7 L27-40: “The subject matter can be applied to some embodiments of not only mobile devices but also generic wireless devices. To expand the coverage of a cellular communication system, a first wireless device with a poor cellular signal may use its non-cellular interface to communicate to a second wireless device which has a good cellular signal and relays the signals from the first wireless device to the cellular base station. In such embodiments, the cellular resources, such as data rate and bandwidth, of the second wireless device is shared with the first wireless device. The first wireless device successfully communicates to the cellular base station via two hops: hopping to the second wireless device that in tum hops to the cellular base station.”; C1 L65-67, C2 L1-15: “In one aspect, disclosed herein are non-transitory computer- readable storage media encoded with a computer program including instructions executable by a mobile processor to create an application comprising (a) a first software module configuring a non-cellular interface for establishing a first wireless link between the non-cellular interface and a non-cellular access point, and (b) a second software module configuring the non-cellular interface and a cellular interface for relaying a cellular communication between an originating wireless device and a cellular base station, … (ii) establishing and maintaining an internal bridge between the second non-cellular virtual interface and the cellular interface …”)
Regarding the limitations comprising:
the payments system further comprising one or multiple Custom Made Devices, each custom made device including a passive repeater,
the payments system further comprising one or multiple system servers, each system server including a custom software module,
Zalewski makes these teachings in a related endeavor (C7 L15-26: “As will be described in greater detail below, the devices are in some embodiments configured or paired to communication with specific network devices, which in turn provide access to the Internet. In other embodiments, the devices may connect to an ad-hoc network, such as a wireless mesh network, or other wireless network to enable access to the Internet. The data sensed, captured, and processed by these devices can then be received by the end nodes, and based on the coded data sent to the end node, the end node can act to save the data, send the data to another device, use repeater nodes to transmit the data to other processing nodes/servers/devices”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Zalewski with the invention of Bhargava as disclosed above for the motivation of facilitate data exchanges between devices with network access with other devices.
Bhargava further discloses:
wherein:
the first wireless device has no internet connection, which prohibits the first wireless device to communicate directly with the system server, (C1 L54-64: “The subject matter described herein exploits the hybrid of cellular and non-cellular networks to expand the coverage of cellular base stations. When a wireless device participates in a hybrid network, the subject method can configure the device's non-cellular interface to originate or relay a cellular communication via hopping on the non-cellular network, without interrupting an existing non-cellular connection of the device. The concurrent uses of the non-cellular interface maximize the utilization of its computing and communication resources to expand the cellular coverage.”)
Regarding the limitations comprising:
wherein
the respective custom software application when downloaded into the first wireless device is executable on the first wireless device to auto configure the first wireless device as a paying wireless device, and the respective custom software application when downloaded into the second wireless device is executable on the second wireless device to auto configure the second wireless device as a payment receiving wireless device,
wherein the first wireless device, is configured to make payment directly contactlessly to the second wireless device,
Dunne makes these teachings in a related endeavor (¶¶[24-26]: “The present disclosure provides a computer-implemented method and system for token-based transactions using a payment card such as a credit or debit card. The computer-implemented method may be embodied as part of an application or 'app' on a user device such as mobile device. The user device may be a customer or payer device for making a payment. The user device may alternatively be a merchant or payee device. It will be understood that payments may be made from the payer device to the payee device using tokens, as described below. In a situation where both the payer device and payee device are mobile devices such as smart phones, peer-to-peer (P2P) transactions can be conducted between users that have the app installed and provisioned on their mobile device but either one or both parties are offline … A computer-implemented method and system for an offline peer-to-peer (P2P) token based transaction using a payee device and a payer device are provided, the payee device and the payer device being configured to communicate with each other. The method and system may be primarily aimed at users of mobile devices such as smartphones. For example, the computer-implemented method may be embodied as part of an application or 'app' on the mobile device. Such users may be purchasers or merchants, or more generically, payers and payees. An app installed on the payer or payee device may be regarded as a customer app or merchant app, respectively …”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of- the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Dunne with the invention of Bhargava as disclosed above for the motivation of facilitating a user's inability to make secure payment card transactions
with entities when they are in an offline state.
Regarding the limitations comprising:
wherein the second wireless device is configured to automatically share credentials of an internet sharing medium from the second wireless device to the first wireless device,
wherein the custom software application of the first wireless device is executable on the first wireless device to use the received credentials to connect to the internet sharing medium of the second wireless device and to make a payment transaction,
wherein
the first wireless device and the second wireless device are configured to communicate with each other and to start the payment transaction when the first wireless device and the second wireless device are on each side of the Custom Made Device, and when the first wireless device and the second wireless device are in near proximity of the repeater of the Custom Made Device,
the server custom application is executable to execute the payment transaction, including to send an amount of cash n electronic form from an account of the first wireless device to an account of the second wireless device.
Zalewski makes these teachings in a related endeavor (C3 L55-57: “… the devices enable communication over a wireless network, which enables access to the Internet …”; C4 L52-54: “FIG. 13A illustrates an example of a WCC device, associated with a local proximity, in accordance with some embodiments”; C7 L15-19: “… the devices are in some embodiments configured or paired to communication with specific network devices, which in turn provide access to the Internet.”; C23 L17-22: “… In one embodiment, the WCC device can use various forms or protocols for the wireless communication, so long as the data can be transmitted to an end node ( e.g., in this case it is the user device standing in front of the device)”; C24 L26-29: “… In one embodiment, a WCC device is an authentication system for securely accessing systems. In simple authentication, a WCC device can be a portable password storage device.”; C25 L4-21: “… the secondary device forwards the payload to either the requested secure resource or to another device to add credential to the authentication process … Master or site specific passwords, code, authentication tokens, public, private keys or other authentication criteria may be safely stored on the WCC without risk of tampering. WCC dials and settings may select an authentication service or site for which access is sought. WCC transmission payload will include associated credentials or sequence necessary to engage in the designated scheme for access to the site … When activating, the WCC transmits the authentication data to a receiver, typically a host PC or cell phone, router or any end-node”; C25 L19-21: “… When activating, the WCC transmits the authentication data to a receiver, typically a host PC or cell phone, router or any end-node”; C25 L58-65: “… the user types their username followed by their password at least one time. Using the keyboard as in the above example, the user would enter the username and password for the selected site. Upon pressing enter, the WCC may transmit the credentials, causing the credentials to be tested, and provide feedback to the user to indicate that access to the site was successful; C52 L7-20: “… FIG. 13A illustrates an example of a WCC device 100, associated with a local proximity 450. In this example, the local proximity can be a physical distance between the WCC device 100 and other local nodes 452. The other local node 452 can be other computing devices that have wireless capability. Other computing devices can include Internet connected or wirelessly connected computers, cell phones, tablet computers, routers, repeaters, … servers”; C53 L5-14: “… In general, the local proximity is a relative term, which relates to nodes that are local to a specific node. For instance, one of the local nodes 452 may be capable of wirelessly communicating with remote node 454, but device 100 does not directly have wireless communication to the remote node 454. In one example, the local node 450 to access a repeater or forwarder of the data or information or payload being transferred or sent by the device 100 to a specific end node 462 …”; C57 L61-65: “… In some embodiments, user fingerprints are stored in the cloud and WCC devices couple to servers capable of retrieving a range of tiered access from simple identity through payment account information, depending on the intended application”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Zalewski with the invention of Bhargava as disclosed above for the motivation of facilitate data exchanges between devices with network access with other devices.
Re Claim 7-19: (Cancelled)
Re Claim 20: (New) Bhargava in view of Zalewski in view of Dunne discloses the payments system of Claim 6. Regarding the limitation(s) comprising:
wherein the wireless devices, and the multiple Custom Made Devices, are configured to communicate with each other directly,
wherein the communications between the wireless devices directly are through at least one type of the following ultra-low range transceivers included in the wireless devices: a) a NFC (near field communications) transceiver, or b) an audio transceiver operable in an inaudible frequency range for humans, or c) a light transceiver operable in a non-visible range for humans.
Zalewski makes these teachings in a related endeavor (C1 L54-64: “The subject matter described herein exploits the hybrid of cellular and non-cellular networks to expand the coverage of cellular base stations. When a wireless device participates in a hybrid network, the subject method can configure the device's non-cellular interface to originate or relay a cellular communication via hopping on the non-cellular network, without interrupting an existing non-cellular connection of the device. The concurrent uses of the non-cellular interface maximize the utilization of its computing and communication resources to expand the cellular coverage.” C4 L52-54: “FIG. 13A illustrates an example of a WCC device, associated with a local proximity, in accordance with some embodiments”; C7 L15-19: “… the devices are in some embodiments configured or paired to communication with specific network devices, which in turn provide access to the Internet.”; C52 L56-60: “… Wireless mesh networks can, in one embodiment, use various ones or combinations of wireless technologies, such as Wi-Fi ( e.g., 802.xx), Bluetooth, NFC, radio, and cellular technologies, etc.”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Zalewski with the invention of Bhargava as disclosed above for the motivation of facilitate data exchanges between devices with network access with other devices.
Re Claim 21: (New) Bhargava in view of Zalewski in view of Dunne discloses the payments system of Claim 6. Regarding the limitation(s) comprising:
wherein each passive repeater is a NFC repeater comprising two antennas.
Zalewski makes these teachings in a related endeavor (C37 L15-17: “… Additionally, an RF antenna 168 can also be provided as part of the WCC 100 …”; C52 L56-60: “… Wireless mesh networks can, in one embodiment, use various ones or combinations of wireless technologies, such as Wi-Fi ( e.g., 802.xx), Bluetooth, NFC, radio, and cellular technologies, etc.”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Zalewski with the invention of Bhargava as disclosed above for the motivation of facilitate data exchanges between devices with network access with other devices.
Re Claim 22: (New) Claim 22, as best understood by the Examiner, encompasses the same or substantially the same scope as claim 6. Accordingly, claim 22 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 6.
Re Claim 23: (New) Claim 23, as best understood by the Examiner, encompasses the same or substantially the same scope as claim 20. Accordingly, claim 23 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 20.
Re Claim 24: (New) Claim 24, as best understood by the Examiner, encompasses the same or substantially the same scope as claim 21. Accordingly, claim 24 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 21.
Conclusion
Wee et al. (US 8,027,635 B2) discloses relaying third party wireless communications through a portable wireless system. In Wee, A portable wireless system is described. The portable wireless
system has a controller that is operable to selectively configure the portable wireless system as a personal electronic appliance or a third party wireless repeater that is configured to relay wireless signals between a third party electronic appliance and a wireless network. Accordingly, the portable wireless system ( e.g., a cellular telephone, a pager or a personal digital assistant) may act as a wireless repeater for third party wireless communications when the portable wireless system otherwise is not in use. In this way, the portable wireless system increases the utilization of existing wireless network infrastructures (e.g., a cellular telephone network) by making one or more unused wireless channels available to other devices. A novel incentives-based business model that encourages owners of portable electronic appliances to fully utilize existing wireless network capacity also is described.
Claim 6 and 20-24 are rejected.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Clifford Madamba whose telephone number is 571-270-1239. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Thu 7:30-5:00 EST Alternate Fridays.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ryan Donlon, can be reached at 571-272-3602. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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://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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CLIFFORD B MADAMBA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3692