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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 05/20/2026 has been entered.
The following is a non-final office action in response to the request for continued examination of 05/20/2026.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-2 and 5-6, as originally filed 05/20/2026, are pending and have been examined on the merits (claim 1 being independent). Claim 1 has been amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments and amendments filed 05/20/2026 have been fully considered.
With regard to the rejections of the claims under 35 USC 103, Applicant’s arguments and amendments have been considered but are not moot as a new ground of rejection has been added and Examiner respectfully disagrees. Examiner notes that Applicant is arguing newly amended claim language. Further as noted in the citation above the prior art and the amendments are addressed by the rejections cited under 35 USC 103.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
In the rejections below, where claims are currently amended, this is indicated by underlining.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi, Hwal Seok et al. (hereinafter Choi), KR Publication Number 2020-0143195 A in view of Tierney, John et al. (hereinafter Tierney), EP 3933734 A1.
Regarding claim 1:
Choi discloses the following:
A method for carrying out a wireless transaction (reads on “The user device 1 and the payment terminal 3 may communicate with each other using a short range wireless communication technology, such as Bluetooth, NFC”) between a first computing device (reads on “The user device 1”) and a second computing device (reads on “the payment terminal 3”) for authorization through a transaction processing system, the method performed at the first computing device, the method comprising: (Choi: See abstract and page 9, lines 1-7: “The user device 1 and the payment terminal 3 may communicate with each other using a short range wireless communication technology, such as Bluetooth, NFC, or a short-range wired communication technology, such as USB cable communication. The user device 1 is a portable terminal implementing the wired/wireless network communication technology and the short-range wireless communication technology, and may be, for example, a smart phone or a tablet. The user device 1 is not limited to a specific type of device. The payment terminal 3 is a device implementing the short-range wireless communication technology or the short-range wired communication technology, and may be a device having a function of processing payment using a key and signature information, such as a public transportation fee processing terminal, a POS, or the like.”)
establishing a secure network connection (reads on “for example, 4G, 5G, LTE”) with a third computing device (reads on “the server 2”); (Choi: See page 8, lines 43-44: “The user device 1 and the server 2 can communicate with each other remotely using a wired or wireless network communication technology, for example, 4G, 5G, LTE, and MAN.”)
initiating the wireless transaction (reads on “Bluetooth, NFC”) with the second computing device (reads on “the payment terminal 3”); (Choi: See page 9, lines 1-7: “The user device 1 and the payment terminal 3 may communicate with each other using a short range wireless communication technology, such as Bluetooth, NFC”, and see also page 5, lines 28-30)
providing information to perform a security protocol for the transaction to the third computing device (reads on “the server 2”) over the secure connection, wherein the performance of the security protocol includes a determination of a secure result (reads on “a key”); (Choi: See page 9, lines 9-15: “In step S110, the user device 1 may request the server 2 to transmit a key using the application program 101 installed and executed on the user device 1. In step S130, the server 2 may generate a key in response to a request for transmission of the key. Steps S110 and S160 may be performed through the above-described wired/wireless network communication technology”)
receiving (reads on “the generated key”) a dummy secure result from the third computing device (reads on “the server 2”); and (Choi: See page 9, lines 9-15: “In step S160, the server 2 may transmit the generated key to the user device 1.”)
performing (reads on “In step S500, the user device 1 may perform a payment process with the payment terminal 3 using the key.”) the wireless transaction with the second computing device (reads on “the payment terminal 3”) using the dummy secure result (reads on “using the key”), such that for authorization of the wireless transaction the dummy secure result can be used to reconcile the wireless transaction with a true secure result for the wireless transaction prepared by the third computing device and provided to the transaction processing system. (Choi: See page 9, lines 9-20: “In step S500, the user device 1 may perform a payment process with the payment terminal 3 using the key. The payment process may be performed through a process in which the application program 101 and the payment terminal 3 prepare session keys, respectively, and generate and verify signatures using the session key.”)
wherein the wireless transaction is a contactless payment transaction (reads on “a short range wireless communication technology, such as Bluetooth, NFC”), wherein the first computing device is a consumer computing device (reads on “The user device 1”) and the second computing device (reads on “the payment terminal 3”) is a point of sale terminal, and wherein the secure result (reads on “secured a payment key”) is an application cryptogram for the contactless payment transaction, (Choi: See page 3, lines 35-36: “the payment terminal 3 and the user device 1 have each secured a payment key, and these two payment keys are the same. Therefore, the payment terminal 3 and the user device 1 can perform offline payment using the payment key.” And page 9, lines 1-7: “The user device 1 and the payment terminal 3 may communicate with each other using a short range wireless communication technology, such as Bluetooth, NFC”)
Choi does not explicitly disclose the following, however Tierney further teaches:
the method further comprising receiving variables computed (reads on “the cryptogram”) for a digital signature by the third computing device (reads on “The transaction processing server 106”) along with the dummy secure result, (Tierney: See paragraph [0047] “The transaction processing server 106 returns the cryptogram to the mobile communication device 110 via the wireless data connection. Preferably, a secure channel is used. The cryptogram may itself be encrypted using an asymmetric key pair when sent back to the mobile communication device 110.”)
wherein the variables comprise pre-computed parameters (reads on “an asymmetric key associated with the DPAN”) for the digital signature, and using the computed variables (reads on “the cryptogram”) and a private key stored (reads on “the mobile communication device 110 may comprise cryptographic keys”) at the first computing device to digitally sign (reads on “The mobile communication device 110 may transmit digitally signed certificates and an asymmetric key associated with the DPAN and the main issuer in order to allow the POS terminal 103”) transaction data including the dummy secure result to provision to the second computing device (reads on “the POS terminal 103”). (Tierney: See paragraphs [0047] “The transaction processing server 106 returns the cryptogram to the mobile communication device 110 via the wireless data connection. Preferably, a secure channel is used. The cryptogram may itself be encrypted using an asymmetric key pair when sent back to the mobile communication device 110.” And [0049] “The mobile communication device 110 may transmit digitally signed certificates and an asymmetric key associated with the DPAN and the main issuer in order to allow the POS terminal 103 to perform Offline Data Authentication in accordance with EMV® specifications.”, and see also [0044])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a payment method in which a user device and a payment terminal perform payment using a key of Choi to include a technique in which payment credentials, e.g. a cryptogram, can be generated remotely and in real time at a point of sale terminal, as taught by Tierney, in order to provide a more secure transaction. (See Tierney, paragraphs [0002-0006])
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi in view of Tierney in further view of Schnieders, Dominik et al. (hereinafter Schnieders) , EP 4123543 A1.
Regarding claim 2:
Choi and Tierney do not explicitly disclose the following, however Schnieders further teaches:
The method of claim 1, further comprising communicating with the third computing device by cellular telecommunications, wherein the third computing device is an edge server, and wherein the third computing device is located at a base station of a telecommunications network. (Schnieders: See paragraph [0034] “The edge cloud server 10 connected to the communication network 13 executes the application backend 140 of the mPOS application 14. The edge cloud server is located close to the terminal device 11. When the mPOS application 14 is operated using a cellular network as the communication network 13, the edge cloud server 10 may be located close to a radio cell 130 of the cellular network”, and see also claim 14)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a payment method in which a user device and a payment terminal perform payment using a key of Choi to include the communication network is a cellular network and the backend server is an edge cloud server located close to a radio cell of the cellular network, as taught by Schnieders, in order to provide more secure connections. (See Schnieders, [0034])
Claim 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi in view of Tierney in further view of Maeng, US Patent Number 11107066 B1.
Regarding claim 5:
Choi and Tierney do not explicitly disclose the following, however Maeng further teaches:
The method of claim 1, wherein the first computing device comprises a memory and a processor. (Maeng: See Fig. 3 and column 7, lines 31-48: “Any of the mobile computing devices 130a, 130b, 130c, for example, may be implemented according to the architecture 300. The architecture 300 comprises a processor unit 310. The memory 320 may be adapted to store an operating system (OS) 330, as well as application programs 340, such as, for example, a mobile wallet application 342”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a payment method in which a user device and a payment terminal perform payment using a key of Choi to include configuring to communicate with the mobile wallet using any suitable contact or a contactless medium, as taught by Maeng, in order to provide more options for the payment method. (See Maeng, column 1, lines 5-67)
Regarding claim 6:
Choi and Tierney do not explicitly disclose the following, however Maeng further teaches:
The method of claim 5, wherein the first computing device (reads on “the mobile wallet 110”) is a mobile telephone configured to use host card emulation for wireless interaction with the second computing device (reads on “the POS device 150a”), and wherein the first computing device comprises a wallet application configured to perform a contactless payment transaction with the second computer device. (Maeng: See column 4, lines 1-9: “The POS device 150a may be configured to communicate with the mobile wallet 110 using any suitable contact or a contactless medium. In some examples, the POS device 150a may be configured to communicate with the mobile wallet 110 utilizing a short range communication medium such as, a Bluetooth connection, a Bluetooth LE connection, a Near Field Communications (NFC) connection, an infrared connection, etc.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a payment method in which a user device and a payment terminal perform payment using a key of Choi to include configuring to communicate with the mobile wallet using any suitable contact or a contactless medium, as taught by Maeng, in order to provide more options for the payment method. (See Maeng, column 1, lines 5-67)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record but not relied upon herein but pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure is listed in the enclosed PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YONG S PARK whose telephone number is (571)272-8349. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:00 PM, EST.
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, Bennett M. Sigmond can be reached on (303)297-4411. 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.
/YONGSIK PARK/Examiner, Art Unit 3694 June 10, 2026
/BENNETT M SIGMOND/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3694
Prosecution Insights