DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/30/2025 has been entered.
Status of the Claims
This is a non-final rejection prepared in response to U.S. Patent Application 18/326,624 filed on 05/31/2023.
Claim 1-2, 4-10, 14 and 17-18 are amended.
Claims 17-20 are withdrawn.
Claims 1-16 are pending and have been considered below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 9 recite the limitation “providing, based on the authentication and based on determining whether the link has expired or not, the resource associated with the link to the requesting user device” which introduce new matter not originally disclosed on the specification. The originally filed specifications and drawings do not contain any description, suggestion or mention providing the resource based on a combination of both authentication and a determination of whether the link has expired. Instead, it provides alternative embodiments in which the resource is provided based either on authentication or on determining whether the link has expired, each operating independently, but not in combination. Therefore, because the original specifications fail to reasonably convey to a person of ordinary skills in the art that the applicant had possession of the claimed concept, the limitation constitutes new matter under 35 U.S.C. 112(a). The applicant is advised to delete or amend the unsupported limitation.
Claims 2-8 and 10-16 are also rejected as they depend from either claim 1 or 9.
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.
Claim 14 is 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.
Claim 14 recites “wherein obtaining information indicating the one or more exchanges comprises:…”, however neither the independent claim 9 from which it depends on nor claim 14 itself recites an “obtaining information…” limitation. The previously recited “obtaining information…” limitation on was deleted from the independent claim and no corresponding step remains in the claim. Therefore, because there is no antecedent basis or previously introduced ““obtaining information…” limitation in the claim, it is unclear what step is being further limited by the “wherein obtaining information indicating the one or more exchanges comprises:…” limitation rendering the claim indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
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 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an
abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1: Claims 1-8 are directed to a system (i.e., machine, and manufacture). Claims 9-16 are directed to computer-implemented method (i.e., process). Therefore, these claims fall within the four statutory categories of invention, and thus must be further analyzed at Step 2A to determine if the claims are directed to a judicial exception (See MPEP 2106.03, subsection II).
Step 2A Prong One: Claim 9, recites (i.e., sets forth or describes) an abstract idea. More specifically, the following bolded claim elements recite abstract ideas while the non-bolded claim elements recite additional elements according to MPEP 2106.04(a).
A method of authentication for an access- controlled resource, comprising:
transmitting, to a requesting user device, a message that identifies a link associated with a resource, wherein
the resource provides information related to one or more exchanges conducted by a first user related to a first account, wherein
the requesting user device is related to a second account, and wherein the link is configured to expire after a particular time period;
causing, based on transmitting the link, the requesting user device to switch to a cellular connection from another communication connection;
receiving, from the requesting user device and based on causing the requesting user device to switch to the cellular connection, a request to access the resource via the link,
determining an authentication of the requesting user device to access the resource based on network or device information related to the cellular connection captured from switching to the cellular connection;
providing, based on the authentication and based on determining whether the link has expired or not, the resource associated with the link to the requesting user device;
receiving, from the requesting user device and via the resource, an indication to perform a peer-to-peer transfer from the second account to the first account, wherein
a transfer amount of the transfer is related to the one or more exchanges; and
causing, based on the indication, the peer-to-peer transfer from the second account to the first account.
Claim 9, recites (i.e., sets forth or describes)a method for securely facilitating peer to peer transfers. The claim achieves this by transmitting a message identifying a resource to a requesting user, receiving a request to access the resource from the requesting user, authenticating the requesting user, providing access to the resource to the requesting user based on the authentication, receiving a request to make a peer to peer payment via the resource and completing the peer to peer transfer . Claim 1 is significantly similar to claim 9. As such claim 1 also recite an abstract idea. Specifically, the claim under its broadest reasonable interpretation recites limitations grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas (i.e., commercial or legal interactions).
Step 2A Prong Two: Because the claim recites abstract ideas, the analysis proceeds to
determine whether the claim recites additional elements that recite a practical application of the
abstract ideas. Here, the additional elements of a system, one or more memories, one or more processors, a requesting user device, a cellular connection, another communication connection and a link merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea (MPEP § 2106.05(f)). Therefore, the claim as a whole fail to recite a practical application of the abstract ideas.
Step 2B: Determines whether the claim as a whole amount to significantly more than the exception itself. Evaluating additional elements to determine whether they amount to an inventive concept requires considering them both individually and in combination to ensure that they amount to significantly more than the judicial exception itself. Here, the additional elements, taken individually and in combination, do not result in the claim as a whole, amounting to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed previously with respect to Step 2A, the additional elements merely serve as a tool to perform an abstract idea. Thus, there is no inventive concept in the claim and thus the claim is not eligible, warranting a rejection for lack of subject matter eligibility and concluding the eligibility analysis.
Dependent Claims: Claims 2-8 and 10-16 have also been analyzed for subject matter eligibility. However, claims 2-8 also fail to recite patent eligible subject matter for the following reasons:
Claim 2 recites the following bolded claim elements as abstract ideas while the non-bolded claim elements recite additional elements according to MPEP 2106.04(a).
the one or more processors, to determine the authentication, are configured to: retrieve, from a data source, a registered identifier associated with an assigned number; and compare the registered identifier to a network identifier, wherein a match of the registered identifier and the network identifier indicates the authentication of the requesting user device.
The claim further recites an abstract idea. In other words, it recites limitations grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The non-bolded additional elements fail to recite a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea because it merely serves as a tool to perform the abstract idea (MPEP §2106.05(f)). Further, the additional elements, taken individually and in combination, do not result in the claim as a whole, amounting to significantly more than the judicial exception. Thus, there is no inventive concept in the claim and thus the claim is not eligible, warranting a rejection for lack of subject matter eligibility and concluding the eligibility analysis.
Claim 3 recites the following bolded claim elements as abstract ideas while the non-bolded claim elements recite additional elements according to MPEP 2106.04(a).
the one or more processors, to retrieve the registered identifier, are configured to: transmit an application programming interface (API) request indicating the assigned number; and receive, responsive to the API request, an API response indicating the registered identifier.
The claim further recites an abstract idea. In other words, it recites limitations grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The non-bolded additional elements fail to recite a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea because it merely serves as a tool to perform the abstract idea (MPEP §2106.05(f)). The additional element of one or more processors, an application programming interface (API) is recited at a high level generally amounting to no more than a tool to perform the abstract idea also failing to recite a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea. Further, the additional elements, taken individually and in combination, do not result in the claim as a whole, amounting to significantly more than the judicial exception. Thus, there is no inventive concept in the claim and thus the claim is not eligible, warranting a rejection for lack of subject matter eligibility and concluding the eligibility analysis.
Claim 4 recites the following bolded claim elements as abstract ideas while the non-bolded claim elements recite additional elements according to MPEP 2106.04(a).
the network or the device information related to the cellular connection includes at least one of a network identifier or an assigned number.
The claim further recites an abstract idea. In other words, it recites limitations grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas.
Claim 5 recites the following bolded claim elements as abstract ideas while the non-bolded claim elements recite additional elements according to MPEP 2106.04(a).
the network or the device information related to the cellular connection includes at least international mobile subscriber identities (IMSIs)
The claim further recites an abstract idea. In other words, it recites limitations grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas.
Claim 6 recites the following bolded claim elements as abstract ideas while the non-bolded claim elements recite additional elements according to MPEP 2106.04(a).
the one or more conditions include at least one of: a condition that a name of an entity for an exchange corresponds to one or more designated names,
a condition that a category associated with an entity for an exchange corresponds to one or more designated categories,
a condition that a date associated with an exchange corresponds to one or more designated date ranges, or
a condition that a location associated with an exchange corresponds to one or more designated locations or is a threshold distance from a residence location associated with the first user.
The claim further recites an abstract idea. In other words, it recites limitations grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas.
Claim 7 recites the following bolded claim elements as abstract ideas while the non-bolded claim elements recite additional elements according to MPEP 2106.04(a).
the one or more processors are further configured to: receive, from the requesting user device via the resource, an account number associated with the second account; and store information indicating an association between a second user related to the second account and the account number.
The claim further recites an abstract idea. In other words, it recites limitations grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The non-bolded additional elements fail to recite a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea because it merely serves as a tool to perform the abstract idea (MPEP §2106.05(f)). Further, the additional elements, taken individually and in combination, do not result in the claim as a whole, amounting to significantly more than the judicial exception. Thus, there is no inventive concept in the claim and thus the claim is not eligible, warranting a rejection for lack of subject matter eligibility and concluding the eligibility analysis.
Claim 8 recites the following bolded claim elements as abstract ideas while the non-bolded claim elements recite additional elements according to MPEP 2106.04(a).
the one or more processors are further configured to determine whether the link has expired, and wherein the one or more processors, to provide the resource for the requesting user device, are configured to provide the resource for the requesting user device based on a determination that the link has not expired.
The claim further recites an abstract idea. In other words, it recites limitations grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The non-bolded additional elements fail to recite a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea because it merely serves as a tool to perform the abstract idea (MPEP §2106.05(f)). Further, the additional elements, taken individually and in combination, do not result in the claim as a whole, amounting to significantly more than the judicial exception. Thus, there is no inventive concept in the claim and thus the claim is not eligible, warranting a rejection for lack of subject matter eligibility and concluding the eligibility analysis.
Claim 10 recites the following bolded claim elements as abstract ideas while the non-bolded claim elements recite additional elements according to MPEP 2106.04(a).
the request is made via an application on the requesting user device, and the request indicates an identifier associated with the application, and wherein
determining the authentication comprises: determining that the identifier is associated with the second user.
The claim further recites an abstract idea. In other words, it recites limitations grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The non-bolded additional elements of an application and a requesting user device fail to recite a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea because it merely serves as a tool to perform the abstract idea (MPEP §2106.05(f)). Further, the additional elements, taken individually and in combination, do not result in the claim as a whole, amounting to significantly more than the judicial exception. Thus, there is no inventive concept in the claim and thus the claim is not eligible, warranting a rejection for lack of subject matter eligibility and concluding the eligibility analysis.
Claim 11 recites the following bolded claim elements as abstract ideas while the non-bolded claim elements recite additional elements according to MPEP 2106.04(a).
the message is designated for an assigned number associated with the user device, and wherein determining the authentication comprises: obtaining, based on the request to access the resource, a network identifier associated with the requesting user device; and
determining the authentication based on a registered identifier associated with the assigned number matching the network identifier or the assigned number matching the network identifier.
The claim further recites an abstract idea. In other words, it recites limitations grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The non-bolded additional elements of a user device and a requesting user device fail to recite a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea because it merely serves as a tool to perform the abstract idea (MPEP §2106.05(f)). Further, the additional elements, taken individually and in combination, do not result in the claim as a whole, amounting to significantly more than the judicial exception. Thus, there is no inventive concept in the claim and thus the claim is not eligible, warranting a rejection for lack of subject matter eligibility and concluding the eligibility analysis.
Claim 12 recites the following bolded claim elements as abstract ideas while the non-bolded claim elements recite additional elements according to MPEP 2106.04(a).
the assigned number is a telephone number, and wherein the network identifier and the registered identifier are international mobile subscriber identities (IMSIs).
The claim further recites an abstract idea. In other words, it recites limitations grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas.
Claim 13 recites the following bolded claim elements as abstract ideas while the non-bolded claim elements recite additional elements according to MPEP 2106.04(a).
the indication to perform the peer-to-peer transfer further indicates a selection of a subset of the one more exchanges that are to be resolved using the peer-to-peer transfer.
The claim further recites an abstract idea. In other words, it recites limitations grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas.
Claim 14 recites the following bolded claim elements as abstract ideas while the non-bolded claim elements recite additional elements according to MPEP 2106.04(a).
receiving, from a different user device associated with the first user, an indication of a selection of the one or more exchanges from the plurality of exchanges.
The claim further recites an abstract idea. In other words, it recites limitations grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The non-bolded additional elements of a different user device fail to recite a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea because it merely serves as a tool to perform the abstract idea (MPEP §2106.05(f)). Further, the additional elements, taken individually and in combination, do not result in the claim as a whole, amounting to significantly more than the judicial exception. Thus, there is no inventive concept in the claim and thus the claim is not eligible, warranting a rejection for lack of subject matter eligibility and concluding the eligibility analysis.
Claim 15 recites the following bolded claim elements as abstract ideas while the non-bolded claim elements recite additional elements according to MPEP 2106.04(a).
the resource is a web page.
The claim further recites an abstract idea. In other words, it recites limitations grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas.
Claim 16 recites the following bolded claim elements as abstract ideas while the non-bolded claim elements recite additional elements according to MPEP 2106.04(a).
determining whether the link has expired, wherein
the resource is provided for the requesting user device based on a determination that the link has not expired.
The claim further recites an abstract idea. In other words, it recites limitations grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The non-bolded additional elements of a requesting user device and a link fail to recite a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea because it merely serves as a tool to perform the abstract idea (MPEP §2106.05(f)). Further, the additional elements, taken individually and in combination, do not result in the claim as a whole, amounting to significantly more than the judicial exception. Thus, there is no inventive concept in the claim and thus the claim is not eligible, warranting a rejection for lack of subject matter eligibility and concluding the eligibility analysis.
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 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, 6, 8-9 and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cozens (US 9,123,038 B2) in view of Zhang (US 20230217310 A1) in further view of Hu (US 20120166803 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 9, Cozens discloses:
transmitting, to a requesting user device, a message that identifies a link associated with a resource, wherein (Cozens Col 5 lines 61-67 & Col 6 lines 1-3, The P2P payment system can issue the payment request to the potential payors. For example, the identification of the request can be listed on the account of the potential payor. In another example, the request can be emailed to the potential payor, texted to the potential payor, transmitted to a P2P payment application operating on the user device of the potential payor via an Internet connection, or in any suitable manner transmitted to the potential payor. In another example, a list of requests can be displayed on a website of the P2P payment system. Cozens Col 6 lines 10-20, The payor can open the P2P payment application to view the requests for payment. Additionally or alternatively, the payor can access the account of the payor on the website of the P2P payment system or via any other suitable application or website. The payor can access a page or option that displays a ranked list of payment requests associated with the payor. For example, the payor can actuate a real or virtual button, open a link to a website, speak a voice command or in any suitable manner request the list of requests. The payor can view the list of requests in any format available to the user interface being utilized. Cozens Col 15 lines 20-30, Returning to FIG. 2, in block 220, the P2P payment system 160 issues the payment request to the potential payors 102. For example, the identification of the request can be listed on the account of the potential payor 102. In another example, the request can be emailed to the potential payor 102, texted to the potential payor 102, transmitted to a P2P payment application 115 operating on the user device 120 of the potential payor 102 via an Internet connection, or in any suitable manner transmitted to the potential payor 102. In another example, a list of requests can be displayed on a website of the P2P payment system 160.)
the resource provides information related to one or more exchanges conducted by a first user related to a first account, wherein the requesting user device is related to a second account, and wherein (Cozens col 6 lines 21-24, The P2P payment system identifies payment requests that are previously associated with the payor. For example, the P2P payment system can identify payment requests that identified the name of the payor or the account of the payor. Cozens col 6 lines 61-62, The P2P payment system displays a ranked list of payment requests for the payor.)
receiving, from the requesting user device and based on causing the requesting user device to switch to the cellular connection, a request to access the resource via the link; (Cozens col 6 lines 4-9, In an alternate example embodiment, the P2P payment system can provide the list of payment requests to all payors who access the P2P payment system. That is, the identifiers are available to every payor for selection. The payor can search the list of all payment requests and select the appropriate request. Col 8 lines 32-35, The payor can select the request that the payor would like to pay. With the user interface on a P2P payment application, the payor can pay the amount that is requested or the payor can enter an alternate amount to pay.)
receiving, from the requesting user device and via the resource, an indication to perform a peer-to-peer transfer from the second account to the first account, wherein a transfer amount of the transfer is related to the one or more exchanges; and (Cozens Col 10 lines 55-57, The payor device 120 may represent the devices with which the user 101 may conduct a peer-to-peer transaction or other transaction. Cozens Col 18 lines 13-22, In block 440, the payor 102 can select the request that the payor 102 would like to pay. The payor 102 can select the request to pay by indicating the selection on the user interface. The P2P payment application 115 or the P2P payment system 160 can direct the payor 102 to a payment page on the user interface with the transaction data populated. The payor 102 can modify any entries in the payment page, such as by lowering the payment amount, changing the recipient, adding a note or message, or any other suitable modification. See claim 7 and Fig 2-225)
causing, based on the indication, the peer-to-peer transfer from the second account to the first account. (Cozens Col 8 lines 33-40, With the user interface on a P2P payment application, the payor can pay the amount that is requested or the payor can enter an alternate amount to pay. If the request is on the P2P payment system then the P2P payment system can fill in the data to conduct the transaction with the information of the recipient, the payor, and the transaction details. Alternatively, the payor can manually enter the information or select information from a list on the user interface. Cozens Col 18 lines 25-28, Returning now to FIG. 2, in block 230, with the user interface on a P2P payment application 115, the payor 102 can pay the amount that is requested or the payor 102 can enter an alternate amount to pay. See claim 5)
Cozens further discloses:
one or more memories; and (Cozens Col 19 lines 25-45, The system memory 2030 may include non-volatile memories such as read-only memory ("ROM"), programmable read-only memory ("PROM"), erasable programmable read-only memory ("EPROM"), flash memory, or any other device capable of storing program instructions or data with or without applied power. The system memory 2030 may also include volatile memories such as random access memory ("RAM"), static random access memory ("SRAM"), dynamic random access memory ("DRAM"), synchronous dynamic random access memory ("SDRAM"). Other types of RAM also may be used to implement the system memory 2030. The system memory 2030 may be implemented using a single memory module or multiple memory modules. While the system memory 2030 is depicted as being part of the computing machine 2000, one skilled in the art will recognize that the system memory 2030 may be separate from the computing machine 2000 without departing from the scope of the subject technology. It should also be appreciated that the system memory 2030 may include, or operate in conjunction with, a non-volatile storage device such as the storage media 2040).
one or more processors, communicatively coupled to the one or more memories, configured to: (Cozens Col 19 lines 3-24, The processor 2010 may be configured to execute code or instructions to perform the operations and functionality described herein, manage request flow and address mappings, and to perform calculations and generate commands. The processor 2010 may be configured to monitor and control the operation of the components in the computing machine 2000. The processor 2010 may be a general purpose processor, a processor core, a multiprocessor, a reconfigurable processor, a microcontroller, a digital signal processor ("DSP"), an application specific integrated circuit ("ASIC"), a graphics processing unit ("GPU"), a field programmable gate array ("FPGA"), a programmable logic device ("PLD"), a controller, a state machine, gated logic, discrete hardware components, any other processing unit, or any combination or multiplicity thereof. The processor 2010 may be a single processing unit, multiple processing units, a single processing core, multiple processing cores, special purpose processing cores, co-processors, or any combination thereof. According to certain embodiments, the processor 2010 along with other components of the computing machine 2000 may be a virtualized computing machine executing within one or more other computing machines.)
Cozens does not disclose, however Zhang teaches:
causing, (¶0012, include operations, features, means, or instructions for receiving an indication for the UE to change dual networking modes in response to the message indicating that the non-cellular network will become unavailable, where the indication configures the UE to switch to the cellular network, or configures the UE to switch to a different dual networking mode. ¶0013, include operations, features, means, or instructions for determining to change dual networking modes, where the UE determines to switch to the cellular network, or to switch to a different dual networking mode based on predicting that the non-cellular network will become unavailable. ¶0036, The instructions may be executable by the processor to cause the apparatus to receive, from a UE, a message indicating that a non-cellular network will become unavailable, the base station associated with a cellular network and providing cellular communications to the UE in accordance with a dual networking mode for steering, switching, or splitting traffic between the cellular network and the non-cellular network, transmit an indication for the UE to change dual networking modes, where the indication configures the UE to switch to the cellular network, or configures the UE to switch to a different dual networking mode, and communicate with the UE in accordance with the dual networking mode in accordance with the indication. ¶0117, In some case, at 420, UE 115-b may receive an indication for UE 115-b to change dual networking modes in response to the message indicating that the non-cellular network will become unavailable, where the indication may configure UE 115-b to switch to the cellular network, or may configure UE 115-b to switch to a different dual networking mode. ¶0118, In some cases, UE 115-b may determine to change dual networking modes, where the UE determines to switch to the cellular network, or to switch to a different dual networking mode based on predicting that the non-cellular network will become unavailable.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify Cozens with Zhang’s teaching. Although, Zhang does not explicitly state that the switch is triggered by transmitting the link, it would’ve been obvious that transmitting a link to a client, as taught by Cozens, could serve as a trigger to initiate the network switch described by Zhang. This switch would allow the system to obtain cellular network information required to authenticate the device. One of ordinary skills in the art would have been motivated to combine these elements in order enable a user to access a resource via a link that is restricted based on the cellular authentication.
The combination of Cozens and Zhang do not disclose, however Hu teaches:
the link is configured to expire after a particular time period; (¶0038, An example of a valid URL format is as follows: ¶0039, rtsp://10.10.10.10/Music/3gp/GL_CEW_V3GQ.3gp?090820180000+861390123- 4 567+2d95de254653ecd7ee653769a3c041cf ¶0040, where rtsp://10.10.10.10/Music/3gp/GL_CEW_V3GQ.3gp? is the URL of the original accessed resource; 090820180000 is the expiry time, indicating that the URL is valid until 2009-08-20 18:00; 8613901234567 is a mobile phone number, indicating that the MSISDN that accesses the resource is 8613901234567; 2d95de254653ecd7ee653769a3c041cf is the hash value obtained by applying the MD5 algorithm to "rtsp://10.10.10.10/Music/3gp/GL_CEW_V3GQ.3gp?090820180000+8613901234567+- mobileone", where mobileone is the secret key. If the hash value is not consistent, it indicates that the URL link is altered.)
determining an authentication of the requesting user device to access the resource based on network or device information related to the cellular connection captured from switching to the cellular connection; (¶0047, Step 205: The gateway device obtains the user terminal information included in the URL link and performs a validity check on the URL link according to the user terminal information stored on the network side. ¶0048, Specifically, the gateway device parses the URL link to obtain the user terminal information included in the URL link and performs the validity check according to the user terminal information stored on the network side and the user terminal information included in the URL link. That is, the gateway device judges whether the user terminal information stored on the network side is consistent with the user terminal information included in the URL link. If the user terminal information stored on the network side is not consistent with the user terminal information included in the URL link, the validity check fails and the service flow is blocked; if the user terminal information stored on the network side is consistent with the user terminal information included in the URL link, the procedure proceeds to subsequent verifications. It should be noted that, when the system is configured not to verify other information, after the validity check of the user terminal information succeeds, subsequent verifications are not performed and the gateway device may send the data flow to the service server which provides service to the user terminal. ¶0052, The gateway device performs DPI (Deep Packet Inspection, deep packet inspection) parsing on the received service request message to obtain the URL link and parses the URL link that requires validity check according to the format defined in step 202 to obtain the user terminal information, expiry time, and encryption result that are carried in the URL link. After performing DPI parsing on the received message, the gateway device judges whether the format of the obtained URL link is the same as the defined format. If the format of the obtained URL link is the same as the defined format, the procedure proceeds to the subsequent validity check; if the format of the obtained URL link is different from the defined format, the validity check fails and the service flow is blocked. The defined format may be negotiated by the gateway device and the portal server in advance or a defined format set on the gateway device.)
providing, based on the authentication and based on determining whether the link has expired or not, the resource associated with the link to the requesting user device; (¶0054, Step 206: The gateway device performs the validity check according to the link expiry time carried in the URL link and the current system time. That is, the gateway device compares the link expiry time carried in the URL link with the current system time. If the current system time exceeds the link expiry time, the validity check fails and the service flow is blocked; if the current system time does not exceed the link expiry time, the procedure proceeds to subsequent verifications. ¶0058, Step 208: After the user passes the URL verification, the user may access the resource within the link expiry time for multiple times.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify the combination of Cozens and Zhang with Hu’s teaching. One of ordinary skills in the art would have been motivated to combine these elements in order to verify the user based on the information associated with the device and the phone number instead of having the user enter a user name and password. This process will stream line the authentication process making it more user friendly, secure and maintaining an audit trail.
Further, the claimed limitation “…configured to…” in “the link is configured to expire after a particular time period;”, “causing…” in “causing, based on transmitting the link, the requesting user device to switch to a cellular connection from another communication connection” and “causing, based on the indication, the peer-to-peer transfer from the second account to the first account” consists of language disclosing an intended result, so it is considered but given no patentable weight. (see MPEP 2111.05, MPEP 2114 and authorities cited therein). The reference is provided for the purpose of compact prosecution.
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Cozens, Zhang and Hu further discloses:
the one or more processors are configured to scan data associated with the first account to identify data that satisfy one or more conditions, wherein the one or more conditions include at least one of: a condition that a name of an entity for an exchange corresponds to one or more designated names, a condition that a category associated with an entity for an exchange corresponds to one or more designated categories, a condition that a date associated with an exchange corresponds to one or more designated date ranges, or a condition that a location associated with an exchange corresponds to one or more designated locations or is a threshold distance from a residence location associated with the first user. (Cozens Col 4 lines 12-29, The P2P payment system can identify potential payors for the request. The P2P payment system can identify the potential payors from the location of the requester and the location of the potential payors, from the social graph of the recipient and the potential payors, by manual input of the recipient, from any other suitable methods or combination of methods. The P2P payment application can employ the Global Positioning System ("GPS") location technology or other location identifying technology of the user device of the requester to transmit the location of the device and thus the location of the requester. The location can be transmitted to a server located in a P2P payment system. The P2P payment application can gather the location data directly from the user device or the P2P payment application can request the location from another location-based application operating on the user device. In another example, the P2P payment application can determine the location of the user device from a device supplying Wi-Fi connection. Cozens Col 4 lines 34-43, The P2P payment system searches for other mobile devices operating in a predetermined proximity of the requester. The P2P payment system can use the same location technologies to locate the potential payor devices that the P2P payment system used to locate the recipient or any other location technology. The proximity threshold can be configured by the requester or the P2P payment system. The proximity threshold can further be variable based upon factors predetermined by the requester or the P2P payment system. Cozens Col 4 lines 53-67, Additionally or alternatively, the location recorded by a potential payor at the time of the request can be determined at a later time. For example, if the recipient entered the request at a time after leaving the location of the transaction, the P2P payment system can determine the transaction time and location and look for potential payors that were at the location at the time of the transaction. The potential payors may have an application that has logged the locations of the payor and the P2P payment system can extract the location at the time of the transaction. Additionally or alternatively, the potential payor may have "checked in" to the location and thus the P2P payment system can extract the location form the "check in" application. Any other suitable location determining method may be utilized to determine which potential payors may have been at the transaction location. Cozens Col 5 lines 44-55, Additionally or alternatively, the recipient can manually input the potential payors to be included in the list. For example, the recipient can input the name or other identify of every potential payor. In another example, the recipient can request that every social network contact is identified as a potential payor. In another example, the recipient can request that every contact associated with the employer of the recipient is identified as a potential payor. In another example, the recipient can request that only contacts with which the recipient has had a previous P2P transaction are identified as potential payors. Any other suitable input from the recipient can assist in determining the potential payors. Cozens Col 6 lines 24-28, In another example, the P2P payment system can identify payment requests that were associated with the payor account at the time of the request. The payor may have been associated with a payment request in any other suitable manner.)
Furthermore, the claimed expression of “wherein the one or more conditions include at least one of…” does not move to distinguish over prior art as the description of the conditions include does not affect the positively recited steps in the claim.
Regarding claims 8 and 16, the combination of Cozens, Zhang and Hu further discloses:
determine whether the link has expired, and wherein (Hu ¶0054, Step 206: The gateway device performs the validity check according to the link expiry time carried in the URL link and the current system time. That is, the gateway device compares the link expiry time carried in the URL link with the current system time.)
the resource is provided for the requesting user device based on a determination that the link has not expired. (Hu ¶0054, If the current system time exceeds the link expiry time, the validity check fails and the service flow is blocked; if the current system time does not exceed the link expiry time, the procedure proceeds to subsequent verifications. ¶0058, After the user passes the URL verification, the user may access the resource within the link expiry time for multiple times.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify the combination of Cozens, Zhang and Hu by further incorporating Hu’s additional teaching. One of ordinary skills in the art would have been motivated to combine these elements in order to make the system more secure by preventing unauthorized access of the resource link.
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Cozens, Zhang and Hu further discloses:
the indication to perform the peer- to-peer transfer further indicates a selection of a subset of the one more exchanges that are to be resolved using the peer-to-peer transfer. (Cozens, col 6 lines 7-9, The payor can search the list of all payment requests and select the appropriate request. Col 8 lines 32-33, The payor can select the request that the payor would like to pay. Col 15 lines 34-36, The payor 102 can search the list of all payment requests and select the appropriate request. Col 15 lines 37-38, In block 225, the payor can review a ranked list of payment requests and select a request for payment. col 18 lines 14-17, In block 440, the payor 102 can select the request that the payor 102 would like to pay. The payor 102 can select the request to pay by indicating the selection on the user interface.)
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Cozens, Zhang and Hu further discloses:
receiving, from a different user device associated with the first user, an indication of a selection of the one or more exchanges from the plurality of exchanges. (Cozens col 3 lines 22-28, The group member who pays the debt can submit a request for repayment on the P2P payment application operating on the user device of the requester. The P2P payment application can transmit the request to the P2P payment system. The request can be transmitted via any available technology such as an Internet connection over the network, email, text, or any other suitable communication technology. col 3 lines 39-51, The request can be a summary of the debt owed to the requester or any other suitable format to identify the debt. For example, the requester can attach a copy or other representation of the bill or receipt. In another example, the requester can manually enter the request details. In another example, the P2P payment application can attach the bill payment transaction details from a P2P transaction or other transaction. In another example, the requester can assign specific amounts for each payor to submit, such as by assigning receipt line items to individual payors. In another example, the requester can manually input a different amount for each individual payor. Any other suitable format for the request can be submitted by the requester.)
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Cozens, Zhang and Hu further discloses:
the resource is a web page (col 6 lines 10-18, The payor can open the P2P payment application to view the requests for payment. Additionally or alternatively, the payor can access the account of the payor on the website of the P2P payment system or via any other suitable application or website. The payor can access a page or option that displays a ranked list of payment requests associated with the payor. For example, the payor can actuate a real or virtual button, open a link to a website, speak a voice command or in any suitable manner request the list of requests.)
Claims 2-5 and 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cozens, Zhang and Hu as applied to claim 1 and 9 above, and further in view of Stubblefield (US 2021/0029127 A1).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Cozens, Zhang and Hu teach each and every element of claim 1. The combination do not teach, however Stubblefield teaches:
retrieve, from a data source, the registered identifier associated with the assigned number; and compare the registered identifier to the network identifier, wherein (Stubblefield ¶0047, At a block 520, the system retrieves subscriber information from the user profile maintained by the system. In connection with the user profile, the system maintains known subscriber information for the user account, such as may have been generated during a prior registration or creation process (such as those illustrated in FIGS. 3 and 4). The maintained subscriber information may include, for example, a telephone number or MSISDN that has been verified as being associated with the account.)
a match of the registered identifier and the network identifier indicates the authentication of the requesting user device. (Stubblefield ¶0048, At a decision block 525, the system determines whether subscriber information retrieved from the user profile and subscriber information retrieved from the network (based on the hardware identifier obtained from the device) match. For example, the system may compare the stored and received telephone numbers or the stored and received MSISDNs)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify the combination of Cozens, Zhang and Hu by incorporating Stubblefield’s teaching. One of ordinary skills in the art would have been motivated to combine these elements in order authenticate the user based on the information registered in the system and real-time device information obtained from the network which increases the system security by ensuring that only the intended recipient access the resource.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Cozens, Zhang, Hu and Stubblefield further discloses:
transmit an application programming interface (API) request indicating the assigned number; and receive, responsive to the API request, an API response indicating the registered identifier. (¶0011, The system may also, using a capability provided by the device (e.g., using an API provided by the device operating system), obtain the IMSI of the device. The device-obtained IMSI may be stored on the SIM card installed in the device or stored in a separate storage area of the device (e.g., an eSIM). Using the user-provided telephone number, the system queries a communication network (e.g., the telecommunication network to which the user subscribes) to derive the IMSI that the communication network has associated with the queried telephone number, If the device-obtained and the network-derived IMSIs match, the system regards the user-provided telephone number as being authenticated (i.e., the user provided the true telephone number from the device) and associates the telephone number with the created user account. As described herein, the system uses the authenticated telephone number to facilitate subsequent account accesses. ¶0024, The interface module 202 also provides application programming interfaces (APIs) to enable communication and interfacing with the system 200. APIs may be utilized by other applications, web portals, or distributed system components to use the system. For example, APIs provided by the interface module 202 may be used to integrate with a third-party service provider that implements or facilitates authentication services or services available to the user after authentication, including the data or the functions accessible subsequent to authentication of a user. The user of an end-user device may use an API to interface with system servers and access data or functionalities from the devices operated by third parties.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify the combination of Cozens, Zhang, Hu and Stubblefield above by incorporating Stubblefield’s additional teaching. One of ordinary skills in the art would have been motivated to combine these elements in order to allow for the device to be dynamically authenticated by using real-time data and reducing fraud risk by avoiding reliance on self-reported identifiers from the devices.
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Cozens, Zhang and Hu teach each and every element of claim 1. The combination do not teach, however Stubblefield teaches:
the network identifier and the assigned number are telephone numbers. (Stubblefield ¶0010, The subscriber identifier may be a telephone number or a Mobile Station International Subscriber Directory Number (MSISDN) of a verification device associated with the user. Stubblefield ¶0021, The system additionally obtains one or more identifiers 114, used by a telecommunication network 110 to assist in identifying the end-user device 102, from the telecommunication network based on the subscriber information 120 or the hardware identifier 112. For example, the network identifiers 114 may be a network-derived IMSI 122 or a network-derived telephone number or MSISDN 124.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify the combination of Cozens, Zhang and Hu by incorporating Stubblefield’s teaching. One of ordinary skills in the art would have been motivated to combine these elements to provide a simplistic way of identifying the device by using a phone number which is a unique common identifier used in the art, hence eliminating the need to create and manage additional identifiers.
Furthermore, the claimed limitation “the network identifier and the assigned number are telephone numbers” is non-functional material that does not move to distinguish over prior art as it does not affect the recited steps in claim 1.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Cozens, Zhang and Hu teach each and every element of claim 1. The combination do not teach, however Stubblefield teaches:
the network identifier and the registered identifier are international mobile subscriber identities (IMSIs). (Stubblefield ¶0010, In some embodiments, the hardware identifier associated with a verification device is an International Mobile Equipment Identity (IMEI) or an International Mobile Subscriber Identity (IMSI) in use or associated with the verification device. Stubblefield ¶0021, The system additionally obtains one or more identifiers 114, used by a telecommunication network 110 to assist in identifying the end-user device 102, from the telecommunication network based on the subscriber information 120 or the hardware identifier 112. For example, the network identifiers 114 may be a network-derived IMSI 122 or a network-derived telephone number or MSISDN 124.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify the combination of Cozens, Zhang and Hu by incorporating Stubblefield’s teaching. One of ordinary skills in the art would have been motivated to combine these elements to provide a way of identifying the device by using an international mobile subscriber identities (IMSIs) which is a safer identifier that directly ties up to the device with the phone’s SIM card and isn’t accessible to the user, hence providing a more secure identifier against spoofing.
Furthermore, the claimed limitation “the network identifier and the registered identifier are international mobile subscriber identities (IMSIs)” is non-functional material that does not move to distinguish over prior art as it does not affect the recited steps in claim 1.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Cozens, Zhang and Hu teach each and every element of claim 9. The combination further teaches:
the request is made via an application on the requesting user device, and (Cozens col 3 lines 22-24, The group member who pays the debt can submit a request for repayment on the P2P payment application operating on the user device of the requester.)
The combination do not teach, however Stubblefield teaches:
the request indicates an identifier associated with the application, and wherein (¶0044, Referring to FIG. 5, process 500 begins at a block 505, where the system receives an individual request to access an online service. The request may include information identifying a user account previously registered with the service (e.g., a username), which is associated with a user profile maintained by the system.)
determining the authentication comprises: determining that the identifier is associated with the second user (¶0048, At a decision block 525, the system determines whether subscriber information retrieved from the user profile and subscriber information retrieved from the network (based on the hardware identifier obtained from the device) match. For example, the system may compare the stored and received telephone numbers or the stored and received MSISDNs. If the subscriber information matches, processing continues to a block 530. If the subscriber information does not match, processing continues to a block 535. ¶0049, If at the decision block 525 it was determined that the profile-retrieved and network-retrieved subscriber information matches, then at block 530 the system identifies that the verification device used in connection with account access has been authenticated. That is, the device is provisioned, according to the telecommunication network, to the subscriber information (e.g., telephone number) that was previously registered for accessing the user account. Accordingly, the device is authenticated, and access to the user account may proceed. An authorization indication that the device has been authenticated may be transmitted by the system to, for example, the third-party service corresponding to the account the user wishes to access. In some embodiments the device authentication is used in combination with traditional account verification steps (e.g., a username and password check), as well as device-based verification steps (e.g., code exchange using the device), in order to gain access to the account or services associated with the account; the exemplary additional verification steps may be conducted prior, after, or in parallel with the illustrated process 500.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify the combination of Cozens, Zhang and Hu by incorporating Stubblefield’s teaching. One of ordinary skills in the art would have been motivated to combine these elements in order to improve security by verify the requesting user based on the application identifier.
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Cozens, Zhang and Hu teach each and every element of claim 9. The combination do not teach, however Stubblefield teaches:
the message is designated for an assigned number associated with the user device, and wherein (¶0045, At a block 510, the system obtains a hardware identifier from a device that the user intends to use as a verification device for accessing the account. The verification device may be the device from which the user attempts to access the account. Alternatively, the verification device may be different from the device used to access the account, but may be utilized for further device-based verification prior to account access. At block 510, the system may, for example, obtain the IMSI from the device. The device may obtain its IMSI in response to an application or operating system request. For example, a device running on the Android operating system may return its IMSI in response to a getSubscriberId( ) function call. In response, the device provides the IMSI for the SIM card installed in the device. It will be appreciated however that other techniques exist, both on Android and other operating systems used by devices, to obtain the IMSI of the device as well as other identifiers that uniquely identify the device or installed SIM card.
determining the authentication comprises: obtaining, based on the request to access the resource, a network identifier associated with the requesting user device; and (¶0013, When a user uses a device to attempt to access an account of an online service, the system obtains the IMSI from the device used. The system also identifies the authenticated subscriber information, such as a telephone number, previously associated with the account for which access is sought. ¶0047, At a block 520, the system retrieves subscriber information from the user profile maintained by the system. In connection with the user profile, the system maintains known subscriber information for the user account, such as may have been generated during a prior registration or creation process (such as those illustrated in FIGS. 3 and 4). The maintained subscriber information may include, for example, a telephone number or MSISDN that has been verified as being associated with the account.)
determining the authentication based on a registered identifier associated with the assigned number matching the network identifier or the assigned number matching the network identifier. (¶0013, In some embodiments, the system uses the device-obtained IMSI to query the telecommunication network and determine the telephone number associated with the IMSI; if the telephone number determined based on the network query matches the telephone number previously associated with the account, the device used in connection with the access attempt is authenticated. ¶0048, At a decision block 525, the system determines whether subscriber information retrieved from the user profile and subscriber information retrieved from the network (based on the hardware identifier obtained from the device) match. For example, the system may compare the stored and received telephone numbers or the stored and received MSISDNs)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify the combination of Cozens, Zhang and Hu with Stubblefield’s teaching. One of ordinary skills in the art would have been motivated to combine these elements in order to reduce unauthorized access and improve security by providing an additional verification layer
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Cozens, Zhang, Hu and Stubblefield further teaches:
the assigned number is a telephone number, and wherein (Stubblefield ¶0010, The subscriber identifier may be a telephone number or a Mobile Station International Subscriber Directory Number (MSISDN) of a verification device associated with the user. Stubblefield ¶0021, The system additionally obtains one or more identifiers 114, used by a telecommunication network 110 to assist in identifying the end-user device 102, from the telecommunication network based on the subscriber information 120 or the hardware identifier 112. For example, the network identifiers 114 may be a network-derived IMSI 122 or a network-derived telephone number or MSISDN 124.)
the network identifier and the registered identifier are international mobile subscriber identities (IMSIs). (Stubblefield ¶0010, In some embodiments, the hardware identifier associated with a verification device is an International Mobile Equipment Identity (IMEI) or an International Mobile Subscriber Identity (IMSI) in use or associated with the verification device. Stubblefield ¶0021, The system additionally obtains one or more identifiers 114, used by a telecommunication network 110 to assist in identifying the end-user device 102, from the telecommunication network based on the subscriber information 120 or the hardware identifier 112. For example, the network identifiers 114 may be a network-derived IMSI 122 or a network-derived telephone number or MSISDN 124.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify the combination of Cozens, Zhang, Hu and Stubblefield by incorporating Stubblefield’s additional teaching. One of ordinary skills in the art would have been motivated to combine these elements to provide a way of identifying the device by using an international mobile subscriber identities (IMSIs) and telephone numbers which is a safer identifier that directly ties up to the device with the phone’s SIM card and isn’t accessible to the user, hence providing a more secure identifier against spoofing.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Cozens, Zhang and Hu as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Andersen (US 12,243,028 B2).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Cozens, Zhang and Hu teach each and every element of claim 1. The combination do not teach, however Andersen teaches:
receive, from the requesting user device via the resource, an account number associated with the second account; and (Andersen Col 16 lines 29-33, In some embodiments, the request message can be transmitted to the PSS 120 as part of a financial transaction completed between the user 101 and a customer, e.g., user 102. For example, the user 102 provides her debit card information to pay and approve the charge for a taxi ride. Andersen Col 16 lines 42-44, In another example, the user 102 provides her credit card information to pay and approve the charge for the taxi ride.)
store information indicating an association between the second user and the account number. (Andersen Col 9 lines 55-64, The PSS 200 can communicate with the TFS 110 and/or the user device 104 to receive various types of data. The data can include: (a) data about the user 101, which can be stored in the member database 202; (b) data of one or more financial accounts of the user 101 and/or of the user 102, which can be stored in the financial account database 204; and (c) data of the financial transaction which involves directly or indirectly the intermediary transaction facilitator(s), where such data can be stored in the transaction database 206.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify the combination of Cozens, Zhang and Hu by incorporating Andersen’s teaching. One of ordinary skills in the art would have been motivated to combine these elements in order to enable future automated transactions without the need to re-enter account data every time, enable automatic payments and maintain information for audits and legal purposes.
Response to Arguments
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. § 101
The applicant asserts that the claims integrate the alleged abstract idea into a practical application and presents several assertions in regards to step 2 prong 2. First, the applicant asserts that the claim as amended is not directed to certain methods of organizing human activity grouping but rather integrates the alleged judicial exception into a practical application. The examiner finds it not persuasive and respectfully disagrees. The examiner maintains that the claims remain directed to an abstract idea, specifically directed toward certain methods of organizing human activity (i.e., commercial or legal interactions). Second, the applicant asserts that “the additional elements of claim 1, as amended, (1) reflect an improvement in the functioning of a computer, or an improvement to any other technology or technical field, and (2) apply or use the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment”. The applicant also disagrees with this assertion. The claim merely implements commercial or legal interactions as described above. In response, the examiner finds that a method for securely facilitating peer to peer transfers does not provide any specific improvement to the functioning of the computer or technology. While transmitting a link and causing a device to switch communication networks may appear technical, they are merely applying the abstract idea. Further, the applying of the abstract idea does not improve upon any computer technology. Finally, the applicant asserts that “the claim (1) provides an improvement in network security, by providing a system wherein an ephemeral link is used to limit access to data resources, (2) provides a technical solution of switching device communication connections a cellular connection based on the specific link, and (3) provides enhanced network security by authenticating the requesting user device based on information unique to cellular connections (different from other credentials used for data/account access), in addition to increased security for the peer-to-peer transfer system.” The examiner also finds this not persuasive and respectfully disagrees. The claimed use of an ephemeral link, switching a cellular connection and authentication based on cellular network information does not reflect an improvement to computer functionality or network technology. Rather, they are used to apply the abstract idea of controlling access to a resource and authentication. The claim does not recite a new protocol, modification to a computer operation or a specific enhancement to peer to peer communication. Therefore, the claim does not recite any technological advancement or inventive integration beyond applying these tools to an abstract concept and thus fail to impose any meaningful limit that would transform the abstract idea into a practical application under the second prong of step 2A of the subject matter eligibility framework.
Furthermore, the applicant presents one last assertion in regards to Step 2B. The applicant states that the elements of the claim are sufficient to ensure that the claim amount to “significantly more “ than thew alleged judicial exceptions. However, this assertion is also not persuasive and the examiner disagrees. The claim invention pertains to a method for securely facilitating peer to peer transfers which is an implementation of commercial or legal; interactions as mentioned above. Further, the additional elements of a system, one or more memories, one or more processors, a requesting user device, a cellular connection, another communication connection and a link, as recited in the claim, are merely additional elements representing conventional computer technologies employed to apply the underlying abstract idea. To meet the requirements for patent eligibility, the claim must do more than simply apply this abstract idea using generic technological tools. Therefore, the recited claim, does not include any additional features that rise to the level of an inventive concept under step 2B of the subject matter eligibility framework.
As such the claims remain within an abstract idea and rejection is maintained based on the
newly amended claims.
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. § 103
Applicant submits remarks and arguments geared toward the amended claims (12/30/2025). The examiner notes that the arguments presented by the applicant are geared towards the newly amended claims dated 12/30/2025, whereas the rejections under the final action were based on the amended claims dated 07/23/2025. Examiner has carefully reviewed and considered applicant’s remarks, however they ARE MOOT in light of the fact that they are geared towards the newly added claimed expression in the amendments.
Rejoinder of withdrawn claims
Applicant’s request to rejoin withdrawn claims has been granted in view of the significant amendments to claim 9, which now mirrors claim 1. Accordingly, claims 9-16 have been rejoined. Claims 17-20, however, remain withdrawn.
Conclusion
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 11568030 B1 to Mandia discloses: Systems and methods are provided for registering with a given application. The systems and methods include operations for receiving, with a messaging application, a request to authenticate a phone number from the given application, the phone number being input by a user to register an account with the given application; determining that the phone number received in the request matches a user phone number stored in a user account associated with the messaging application; in response to determining that the phone number received in the request matches the user phone number stored in the user account, transmitting a communication from the messaging application to the given application indicating that the phone number has been authenticated; and causing the given application to register the account for the user to enable the user to log into the given application.
US 2016/0196539 A1 to Koh et al. discloses: In one embodiment, an intended recipient of money transmits a payment link created by the recipient to an intended sender of money, where the link contains a locator to a site of a payment provider, information about the recipient (e.g., phone number), and the amount of money to be sent. The link can be sent via email, text, IM, or other means. The sender then accesses the link, such as by clicking or tapping on the link, which launches a checkout or payment page for the sender on the payment provider site. The sender completes the payment page, and the payment is sent to the recipient by the payment provider.
US 2023/0047509 A1 to Dhodapkar discloses: Particular embodiments receive, by at least one computing device of a payment service, a request to configure a goal to associate with a user account of a user, where the goal is associated with a condition that, when satisfied, causes an incentive to be associated with the user account. The at least one computing device generates a data object for tracking completion of the goal, where the data object is stored in a datastore by the payment service. The at least one computing device monitors, in near-real-time, at least one of managed transaction data associated with users of the payment service or interaction data associated with the user. The at least one computing device determines, based at least in part on comparing at least one of the transaction data or the interaction data to at least the condition, satisfaction of the condition.
US 2018/0247296 A1 to Win et al. discloses: The present document describes a payment system that processes transactions originating from mobile phones, cellular devices, Web browsers, or other mobile devices. A customer initiates a transaction by sending a payment request via SMS, HTTPS, or other network protocol. The payment request includes an amount to be paid and a phone number associated with a recipient. The payment system confirms the identity of the customer, and identifies the recipient based at least in part on the phone number. The payment system supports the fulfillment of payment requests with various combinations of account balances, credit accounts, discounts, and loyalty points. The payment system also provides various merchant features such as ticket vending, automatic discovery of payees and payers, management of merchant terminals, and payroll processing.
US 2020/0242690 A1 to Wang discloses: A digital commodity exchange method is implemented in an electronic device. The method includes receiving a digital commodity and exchanging conditions of the digital commodity, generating a first exchange contract of the digital commodity, storing the first exchange contract to a blockchain platform of the electronic device and broadcasting the first exchange contract on each node of the blockchain, searching a number of exchange contracts in the electronic device and identifying a second exchange contract that matches the exchange information in the first exchange contract, storing the first exchange contract and the second exchange contract in the form of a message queue in the electronic device, and transmitting the digital commodity of the first exchange contract and the digital commodity of the second exchange contract to the terminal device of the second exchange contract and the terminal device of the first exchange contract, respectively.
US 2024/0104567 to Hockey et al. discloses: A system and method for linking to accounts using credential-less authentication that includes: within a first application context at an account-linking computing service: receiving a request to establish an account link, establishing the account link to a user account of an account service using user credentials, and receiving user identifying information of the first application context and storing the user identifying information in association with the account link; and within a second application context at the account-linking computing service: receiving user identifying information of the second application context, searching and identifying a candidate account link using the user identifying information of the second application context, verifying eligibility for access to the account link, and permitting access to the account link upon successful verification of eligibility.
US 9,923,879 B1 to Ziraknejad et al. discloses: The subject matter described herein can be embodied in a computer-readable medium storing instructions that cause one or more processors to perform operations including receiving, from a client device associated with a user account of a first user, a request to grant a second user access to a key associated with a credential. The credential is associated with the user account of the first user, the request includes an address of the second user, and the key permits access to a resource. The operations include accessing, at a server, a second user account based on the address of the second user, and associating, by the server, the key with the second user account, such that the second user is enabled to access the resource. The operations further include communicating, to the address of the second user, a message indicating that the second user account has been associated with the key.
US 2020/0334659 A1 to Colegate et al. discloses: A system and method are disclosed herein leveraging financial networks standards with mobile device data and secure processing and storage environment knowledge to authenticate a device. For instance, a party to a transaction may utilize these elements of information, not traditionally associated with wireless transactions, to achieve a lower probability of fraud and/or a higher confidence associated with the transaction.
US 9,292,838 B2 to Koh et al. discloses: In one embodiment, an intended recipient of money transmits a payment link created by the recipient to an intended sender of money, where the link contains a locator to a site of a payment provider, information about the recipient (e.g., phone number), and the amount of money to be sent. The link can be sent via email, text, IM, or other means. The sender then accesses the link, such as by clicking or tapping on the link, which launches a checkout or payment page for the sender on the payment provider site. The sender completes the payment page, and the payment is sent to the recipient by the payment provider.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JANICE LOZA whose telephone number is (571)270-3979. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30am - 5:00pm.
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, Patrick McAtee can be reached on (571) 272-7575. 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.
/J.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3698
/STEVEN S KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3698