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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of US Patent 11775955. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the patented claim 1 fully anticipates claim 1 of the present application.
Claims 2 and 3 are rejected under nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 2 and 3, respectively, of the US 11775955.
Claim 8 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 8 of US Patent 11775955. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the patented claim 8 fully anticipates claim 8 of the present application.
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 9 and 10, respectively, of the US 11775955.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Under Step 1, claims are directed to at least one statutory category, a method, a device and a method, respectively.
Under Step 2A, Prong 1, Claim 1 or claim 8 or claim 14 is directed to an abstract idea of detecting within a predetermined range; receiving an anonymous tokenized identifier and an alias of information to identify an anonymous account associated with, wherein the anonymous tokenized identifier and the alias enable a user associated with the anonymous account to maintain anonymity with a user of; and adding, the anonymous tokenized identifier to a stored list of payees on, wherein the anonymous tokenized identifier enables to provide the anonymous tokenized identifier to for a payment. This concept of making person-to-person payments fall under the abstract idea category of certain methods of organizing human activity, specifically commercial or legal interactions as it is directed to sales activities or behaviors.
Under Step 2A, Prong Two, the additional elements recited in claim 1 or claim 8 or claim 14 or claims include by one or more processors of a payer user device utilizing a network interface circuit of the payer user device, one or more nearby payee user devices; by the one or more processors via the network interface circuit of the payer user device, a payee user device of the one or more nearby payee user devices that provides a provider computing system, one or more of the nearby payee user devices, the payer user device; by the one or more processors of the payer user device, the payer user device, the payer user device, the provider computing system; a payer user device; a near field communication transceiver configured to facilitate communications with devices; the payer user device; and a digital payment application communicatively coupled with the near field communication transceiver, the digital payment application; the near field communication transceiver, one or more nearby payee user devices; one or more processors of a payee user device utilizing a network interface circuit of the payee user device, one or more nearby payer user devices; the one or more processors via the network interface circuit of the payee user device; the provider computing system. These additional limitations do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. In particular, the claimed computer components, receiving and transmitting data are amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer system, which is not indicative of integration into a practical application; see MPEP 2106.05(f). Accordingly, even in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The claim is directed to an abstract idea. The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Under Step 2B, the claimed invention is considered as a whole whether the additional elements individually or as an ordered combination amount to an inventive concept. Upon further determination, the claims do not integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of by one or more processors of a payer user device utilizing a network interface circuit of the payer user device, one or more nearby payee user devices; by the one or more processors via the network interface circuit of the payer user device, a payee user device of the one or more nearby payee user devices that provides a provider computing system, one or more of the nearby payee user devices, the payer user device; by the one or more processors of the payer user device, the payer user device, the payer user device, the provider computing system; a payer user device; a near field communication transceiver configured to facilitate communications with devices; the payer user device; and a digital payment application communicatively coupled with the near field communication transceiver, the digital payment application; the near field communication transceiver, one or more nearby payee user devices; one or more processors of a payee user device utilizing a network interface circuit of the payee user device, one or more nearby payer user devices; the one or more processors via the network interface circuit of the payee user device; the provider computing system is recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer system, and recites the steps of data manipulation. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer system and/or adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception is not indicative of an inventive concept. This is supported by the original disclosure that describes the computer components merely generic components, [0026] and [00105]-[0106] of applicant’s specification states a general-purpose processor, general-purpose processors and/or general-purpose computing computers. The sending and receiving data over a network have been determined by the courts to be well-known, conventional and routine functions, see MPEP 2106.05(d)(II)(i). Claims 8 and 14 recite similar limitations and are ineligible for similar rational. Therefore, claims are not patent eligible.
As for dependent claims 2-7, these claims recite limitation that further define the same abstract idea noted in claim 1. Therefore, they are considered patent ineligible for the reasons given above.
As for dependent claims 9-13, these claims recite limitation that further define the same abstract idea noted in claim 8. Therefore, they are considered patent ineligible for the reasons given above.
As for dependent claims 15-20, these claims recite limitation that further define the same abstract idea noted in claim 14. Therefore, they are considered patent ineligible for the reasons given above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Pitroda et al. (US Publication: 2007/0198432 A1).
As per claim 1, Pitroda et al. disclose a method comprising: detecting, by one or more processors of a payer user device utilizing a network interface circuit of the payer user device, one or more nearby payee user devices within a predetermined range (¶ 0025 electronic wallet; ¶ 0520 detection of the user client computer); receiving, by the one or more processors via the network interface circuit of the payer user device, an anonymous tokenized identifier and an alias of a payee user device of the one or more nearby payee user devices that provides a provider computing system information to identify an anonymous account associated with one or more of the nearby payee user devices, wherein the anonymous tokenized identifier and the alias enable a user associated with the anonymous account to maintain anonymity with a user of the payer user device (¶ 0012-0017 identifier; ¶ 0666 payee; ¶ 0025 electronic wallet; ¶ 0043-0044 securely encrypt tokens; ¶ 0047-0048; ¶ 0077-0078); and adding, by the one or more processors of the payer user device, the anonymous tokenized identifier to a stored list of payees on the payer user device, wherein the anonymous tokenized identifier enables the payer user device to provide the anonymous tokenized identifier to the provider computing system for a payment (¶ 0015-0025, 0047-0048 and 0077-0078).
As per claim 2, Pitroda et al. disclose the method of claim 1 described above. Pitroda et al. discloses further comprising: determining, by the one or more processors of the payer user device, a communication signal strength between the payer user device and the one or more nearby payee user devices (¶ 0015-0021, 0025 and 520); and displaying, by the one or more processors of the payer user device, an indication of the communication signal strength by a user interface of the payer user device (¶ 0015-0021, 0025 and 520).
As per claim 3, Pitroda et al. disclose the method of claim 1 described above. Pitroda et al. discloses further comprising receiving, by the one or more processors of the payer user device, an input regarding a name, initials, or a picture as identification for the user of the payer user device (¶ 0027 name, username associated with a financial account, ¶ 0043-0046, ¶ 0347).
As per claim 4, Pitroda et al. disclose the method of claim 3 described above. Pitroda et al. discloses further comprising receiving, by the one or more processors of the payer user device, a selection of a payee user device to store a tokenized identifier for the payee associated with the payee user device (¶ 0025 and 043-0049).
As per claim 5, Pitroda et al. disclose the method of claim 3 described above. Pitroda et al. discloses further comprising receiving, by the one or more processors of the payer user device, a selection to be visible or to be anonymous to other user devices (¶ 0031, 0475, 0481 and 0487).
As per claim 6, Pitroda et al. disclose the method of claim 1 described above. Pitroda et al. discloses wherein the stored list of payees is stored on a mobile client application of the payer user device or on a server associated with the provider computing system (¶ 0015-0025).
As per claim 7, Pitroda et al. disclose the method of claim 1 described above. Pitroda et al. discloses further comprising receiving, by the one or more processors of the payer user device, a selection of a payee from the stored list of payees to initiate a payment offer to the user of the payee user device (¶ 0476-0479, and0484).
As per claim 8, Pitroda et al. disclose a payer user device comprising :a near field communication transceiver configured to facilitate communications with devices within a threshold range from the payer user device (¶ 0025 electronic wallet; ¶ 0439; ¶ 0496, ¶ 0519-0520 and 529); and a digital payment application communicatively coupled with the near field communication transceiver, the digital payment application configured to: detect, via the near field communication transceiver, one or more nearby payee user devices within a predetermined range (¶ 0025 electronic wallet; ¶ 0439; ¶ 0496, ¶ 0519-0520 and 529); receive, via the near field communication transceiver, an anonymous tokenized identifier and an alias of a payee user device of the one or more nearby payee user devices that provides a provider computing system information to identify an anonymous account associated with one or more of the nearby payee user devices, wherein the anonymous tokenized identifier and the alias enable a user associated with the anonymous account to maintain anonymity with a user of the payer user device (¶ 0015-0017 fund transfer; ¶ 0025 electronic wallet; ¶ 0043-0044 personalized token; ¶ 0666 payee); and add, via the digital payment application, the anonymous tokenized identifier to a stored list of payees on the payer user device, wherein the anonymous tokenized identifier is configured to enable the payer user device to provide the anonymous tokenized identifier to the provider computing system for a payment (¶ 0015-0025, 0047-0048 and 0077-0078).
As per claim 9, otherwise styled as device claim, is equivalent of claim 2. Please see claim 2 rejection described above.
As per claim 10, otherwise styled as device claim, is equivalent of claim 3. Please see claim 3 rejection described above.
As per claim 11, otherwise styled as device claim, is equivalent of claim 4. Please see claim 4 rejection described above.
As per claim 12, otherwise styled as device claim, is equivalent of claim 5. Please see claim 5 rejection described above.
As per claim 13, otherwise styled as device claim, is equivalent of claim 6. Please see claim 6 rejection described above.
As per claim 14, Pitroda et al. disclose a method comprising: detecting, by one or more processors of a payee user device utilizing a network interface circuit of the payee user device, one or more nearby payer user devices within a predetermined range (¶ 0025 electronic wallet; ¶ 0439; ¶ 0496, ¶ 0519-0520 and 529); providing, by the one or more processors via the network interface circuit of the payee user device, a payment request, an anonymous tokenized identifier, and an alias of the payee user device to a payer user device of the one or more nearby payer user devices that provides a provider computing system information to identify an anonymous account associated with payee user device , wherein the anonymous tokenized identifier and the alias enable a user associated with the anonymous account to maintain anonymity with a user of the payer user device (¶ 0015-0025, 0047-0048 and 0077-0078); and receiving, by the one or more processors via the network interface circuit of the payee user device, an indication from the payer user device of acceptance to transfer an amount indicated in the payment request, wherein the anonymous tokenized identifier enables the payer user device to provide the anonymous tokenized identifier to the provider computing system for payment of the transfer amount (¶ 0015-0025, 0479 and 0432).
As per claim 15, Pitroda et al. disclose the method of claim 14 described above. Pitroda et al. discloses further comprising: determining, by the one or more processors of the payee user device, a communication signal strength between the payee user device and the one or more nearby payer user devices (¶ 0015-0021, 0025 and 520); and displaying, by the one or more processors of the payee user device, an indication of the communication signal strength by a user interface of the payee user device (¶ 0015-0021, 0025 and 520).
As per claim 16, Pitroda et al. disclose the method of claim 15 described above. Pitroda et al. discloses further comprising receiving a selection from the payee user device of one or more nearby payer user devices to request payment, wherein the selection (¶ 0015-0021, 0025 and 520).
As per claim 17, Pitroda et al. disclose the method of claim 14 described above. Pitroda et al. discloses further comprising receiving, by the one or more processors of the payee user device, a selection of a plurality of nearby payer user devices to request a plurality of payments (¶ 0025 and 043-0049).
As per claim 18, Pitroda et al. disclose the method of claim 17 described above. Pitroda et al. discloses wherein an overall payment request is divided into individual payment requests received by the plurality of nearby payer user devices to pay for a shared expense (¶ 0031, 0171, 0475, 0481, 0487 and 0540).
As per claim 19, claim 19 is equivalent of claim 3. Please see claim 3 rejection described above.
As per claim 20, claim 20 is equivalent of claim 5. Please see claim 5 rejection described above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to I JUNG LIU whose telephone number is (571)270-1370. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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, Christine Behncke can be reached at (571)272-8103. 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.
I JUNG LIU
Examiner
Art Unit 3695
/I JUNG LIU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3695