Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/400,959

SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DIGITAL SIGNATURE OF IMAGE-BASED CHECK DEPOSITS AND REAL-TIME REVIEW THEREOF

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Dec 29, 2023
Examiner
LUDWIG, PETER L
Art Unit
3627
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Digital First Holdings LLC
OA Round
2 (Final)
36%
Grant Probability
At Risk
3-4
OA Rounds
4y 0m
To Grant
60%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 36% of cases
36%
Career Allow Rate
193 granted / 540 resolved
-16.3% vs TC avg
Strong +25% interview lift
Without
With
+24.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 0m
Avg Prosecution
60 currently pending
Career history
600
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
23.7%
-16.3% vs TC avg
§103
36.1%
-3.9% vs TC avg
§102
14.0%
-26.0% vs TC avg
§112
25.2%
-14.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 540 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION This Final Office action is in response to Applicant’s Amendment filed on 11/07/2025. Claims 1, 3-11, and 13-20 are pending. The effective filing date of the claimed invention is 12/29/2023. 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 . 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claims 1, 3-11, 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2014/0279482 to Narendra et al. (“Narendra”) in view of U.S. Pat. No. 10,504,185 to Buentello (“Buentello”). With regard to claims 1 and 11, Nerendra discloses the claimed system for providing a digital marking on a scanned image of a check, comprising: a computing device comprising a processor and a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium (e.g. [0124] and Fig. 19; “Check control server 1900 is a computer server accessibly by both sender mobile device 102 and recipient mobile device 120.”); an image capture device coupled to the computing device, the image capture device being configured to generate scanned images of checks received at the system (e.g. [0002] “Remote deposit capture” refers to the process of capturing an image of a paper check to create a substitute check. Remote deposit capture (RDC) is typically performed using a scanner such as a transport scanner, a flat-bed scanner, or a specialized check-scanner; or using a camera, such as those commonly found in smartphones.; [0049]); a customer-facing user interface coupled to the computing device (see e.g. [0088] referring to Fig. 11, method 1100 may be performed by a mobile device such as mobile device 102 or mobile device 120.); a teller-facing user interface coupled to the computing device (see e.g. Fig. 21, recipient mobile device satisfies the claimed teller facing UI) and wherein the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprises executable instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to: generate a scanned image of a rear side of a check to be deposited, wherein the check is received at the image capture device during a current check deposit transaction (see e.g. [0098] referring to Fig. 13 The check image captured at 1320 may be of a blank check or of a manually written check. Any amount of static check information and dynamic check information may be contained on the face of the check. For example, when a blank check image is captured, only static check information may be included in the resulting captured image. Also for example, when a manually filled out check is captured, both static and dynamic check information may be included in the resulting captured image; see e.g. Fig. 14 referring to check deposit [0106-107]); provide a first user interface display via the customer-facing user interface that shows the scanned image of the rear side of the check to be deposited (e.g. [0035) and allows a customer to provide input for generating a digital marking for association with the scanned image of the rear side of the check to be deposited (e.g. [0035-38], wherein the digital marking is a signature of the customer (see [0117] At 1530, the check image is endorsed. The check image may be endorsed in any manner that is acceptable to the bank at which the check is to be deposited. For example, in some embodiments, a user may electronically endorse the RDC compatible check image by typing a name enclosed in slashes (e.g., "/signature/"), or may provide an actual signature by signing directly on touch sensitive display device 354. In other embodiments, a user may have a saved endorsement stamp that is applied to the RDC compatible check image.); modify the scanned image of the rear side of the check to be deposited to include the digital marking ([0068] front and back are imaged; [0070]; see [0117] digital endorsement); communicate with a database implemented by a financial institution and cause a modified scanned image of the rear side of the check including the digital marking to be stored in the database (see e.g. [0033-34] [0088] [0118]); facilitate review of the digital marking by a teller in real time during the current check deposit transaction (e.g. [0037]); and complete the current check deposit transaction (see [0118] transmitted to bank). Narendra does not appear to disclose an explicit teller-facing UI coupled to computing device, where the check deposit is either validated or rejected, in real time, via the teller UI based on the real-time teller UI review of the check with endorsement. However, Buentello teaches at e.g. col. 3, ln. 38-47; col. 3, ln. 47-67; col. 7, ln. 15-45; Fig. 2, 240, col. 9, ln. 30-65, that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the check depositing art to include the ability to create a live communication pathway between the user and the financial institution (i.e. a real-time session), which supports separate “customer-facing” and “teller-facing” views (col. 3, ln. 38-47; col. 3, ln. 47-67; col. 7, ln. 15-45), and further where the teller approves/denies the check deposit based on reviewing the endorsement/biometrics/signature of the user, in real-time, from the live feed (see e.g Fig. 2, 240 Valid?--> Yes, then process check in real time; col. 9, ln. 30-65). The advantage in such live video, real-time processing, is that two users remote from each other can perform the action that they would have performed in person, with the sender signing the check/endorsing, and then the receiver in real-time processing the check, as if the check was signed in front of the second person, and then the check, if valid, can be deposited based on the modified check image with endorsement. Narendra already teaches the customer-side endorsement/signature concepts (including prompting the user to sign on/endorse) and shows mobile app screens around endorsement actions, and Buentello teaches a teller-facing UI where a teller reviews that signature/endorsement “in real time” and authorizes the deposit. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the check processing art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Narendra’s dual system to include such video-based real-time check processing between a user and teller/second party, so that the endorsement can be viewed as performed by the sender and so that check processing can occur live, in real time, and the check deposited if valid, as taught by Buentello. The advantage in such remote-based live video, real-time processing, is that two users remote from each other can perform the action that they would have performed in person, with the sender signing the check/endorsing, and then the receiver in real-time processing the check, as if the check was signed in front of the second person, and then the check, if valid, can be deposited based on the modified check image with endorsement. With regard to claims 3 and 13, Narendra further discloses cause the processor to generate a scanned image of a front side of the check to be deposited provided by the customer to the image capture device during the current check deposit transaction (e.g. [0002] This is typically accomplished by capturing a digital image of the front and back of the paper check into a computer; [0068]). With regard to claims 4 and 14, Narendra further discloses cause the processor to capture information from the scanned image of the front side of the check to be deposited provided by the customer to the image capture device during the current check deposit transaction (e.g. [0068]). With regard to claims 5 and 15, Narendra further discloses cause the processor to provide the first user interface display via the customer-facing user interface that shows the scanned image of the rear side of the check to be deposited and that allows the customer to provide input for generating an annotation to the check to be deposited (e.g. [0035-38]). With regard to claims 6 and 16, Narendra further discloses where the annotation is a restrictive endorsement (e.g. [0117]). With regard to claims 7 and 17, Narendra further discloses where the annotation is a note about a source of the check (see e.g. [0117]). With regard to claims 8 and 18, Narendra further discloses where the annotation is a note about a purpose of the check (e.g. [0117]). With regard to claims 9 and 19, Narendra further discloses cause the processor to modify the scanned image of the rear side of the check to be deposited to include the annotation (see e.g. [0117]). With regard to claims 10 and 20, Narendra further discloses cause the processor to save the modified scanned image of the rear side of the check to be deposited and the scanned image of the front side of the check to be deposited in a check database upon completion of the current check deposit transaction (see e.g. [0036], [0055] etc.). Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 11/07/2025 have been fully considered. The examiner has withdrawn the previously-made rejections under 35 USC 101 based on the amendments and arguments of practical application. As for the prior art rejections, the examiner has converted the previous 102 rejection into a 103 based on the amendments and arguments. The arguments do not apply to the new reference as this was not cited before. The examiner recommends reviewing Buentello, which clearly teaches the ability to have a customer facing and teller facing UI, where when the user signs the check the teller can view and approve the biometrics/signature in real-time, live video stream. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Peter Ludwig whose telephone number is (571)270-5599. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9-5. 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, Fahd Obeid can be reached at 571-270-3324. 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. /PETER LUDWIG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 29, 2023
Application Filed
Jul 02, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Oct 07, 2025
Interview Requested
Oct 15, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Oct 15, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Nov 07, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 16, 2025
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602678
CONFIGURABLE CORRECTIONAL FACILITY COMPUTER KIOSK SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PORTABLE ELECTRONIC DEVICE ACCESS AND MANAGEMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12555086
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR A USER INTERFACE FOR MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12518253
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR E-RECEIPT PLATFORM
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 06, 2026
Patent 12488321
SMART CONTRACT DEPLOYMENT FOR DCF TRUST SERVICES BILLING
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 02, 2025
Patent 12475517
COMPUTER PROGRAM, METHOD, AND SYSTEM FOR AUTOMATED SAVINGS AND TIME-BASED MATCHING CONTRIBUTIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 18, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
36%
Grant Probability
60%
With Interview (+24.6%)
4y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 540 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month