DETAILED ACTION
Receipt is acknowledged of a request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) and a submission, filed on January 29, 2026.
Claim 10 was canceled. Claims 1-9 and 11-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant has amended the claims, thereby overcoming the 35 U.S. C. 112(b) and 35 U.S.C. 101 rejections.
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 1-9 and 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Staflin in view of U.S. Publication No. 2025/0037108 to Thomas et al. (“Thomas”) and U.S. Publication No. 2021/0385886 to Lo et al. (“Lo”).
As per claim 1, Staflin discloses receiving, by a customer device, merchant data when the customer mobile device is at a location of the merchant device;
launching a mobile application on the customer device in response to receiving the merchant data;
receiving customer authentication data by the mobile application on the customer device; transmitting the customer authentication data from the customer mobile device to a merchant server associated with the merchant device for authentication of the customer device;
and pairing the customer device and the merchant device, in response to successful authentication the customer mobile device by the merchant server, the successful authentication to establish a joint interactive session between the customer device and the merchant device
See p.11, lines 4-17 and p. 12, ll. 15-34.
wherein during the joint interactive communication, information from the device is received at the customer mobile device (p. 13 l. 17 – message saying that the PIN has been received; p. 16, ll. 18-21 – sends back a signed message…the message also contains the app session number).
Staflin discloses an auxiliary subsystem such as a fingerprint detector, but does not expressly recite wherein the customer authentication data includes a recognition of biometric data performed via the mobile application on the customer mobile device, performing an ongoing information transfer between the customer mobile device and the merchant device, while the customer mobile device and the merchant device are paired during the joint interactive communication session.
Also, Staflin does not expressly disclose to enable information displayed on the merchant device to be concurrently displayed on the customer mobile device. However, functional recitation(s) using the word "for" or “to enable” have been considered but does not patentable distinguish the claims from the prior art they fail to add any steps are thereby regarded as intend use language. A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in additional steps. See Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Ben Venue Laboratories, Inc., 246 F.3d 1368, 1375-76, 58 USPQ2d 1508, 1513 (Fed. Cir. 2001) (Where the language in a method claim states only a purpose and intended result, the expression does not result in a manipulative difference in the steps of the claim.)
Thomas discloses receiving customer authentication data by a mobile application on the customer mobile device, wherein the customer authentication data includes a recognition of biometric data performed via the mobile application on the customer mobile device (paragraph [0036]).
Lo discloses performing an ongoing information transfer between the customer mobile device and the merchant device, while the customer mobile device and the merchant device are paired during the joint interactive communication session (paragraphs [0101] – mobile device and respective audio device has been paired; [0152] -example conversation scenarios[0154] – consumer interacting with customer service representative (e.g. at a store, bank…)) and [0259] - permitting the sharing of a screen between mobile device during a conversation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Staflin by including the features of Thomas and Lo provides means for pairing devices for communication. Applying the known technique of Thomas and Lo into the system Staflin would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art as resulting in an improved system that would have yielded predictable results.
As per claim 2, Staflin discloses wherein the merchant device includes a teller personal identification number (PIN) pad and a teller terminal, wherein receiving the merchant data includes receiving the merchant data from the teller PIN pad and wherein pairing the customer mobile device includes pairing the customer mobile device with the teller terminal. See p. 1, ll. 21-23; p. 2, ll. 1-9; and p. 14, ll. 1-33).
As per claim 3, Staflin discloses wherein the merchant data is provided to a customer mobile device from a quick response (QR) code or a near field communication (NFC) signal. See p. 10, ll. 34,35; p. 11, ll. 6,7.
As per claim 4, Staflin discloses wherein the merchant data includes an identifying token of a merchant. See p. 11, lines 6,7.
As per claim 5, Staflin discloses wherein the customer authentication data includes one or more of: information entered by a customer via the mobile application and transmitted to the merchant server, information stored in the customer device and transmitted to the merchant server, information associated with biometric data captured by the customer mobile device and transmitted to the merchant server, or information stored in a mobile wallet on the customer device and transmitted to the merchant server. See p.6, ll. 11,12 and p. 7, ll. 9-11.
As per claim 6, Staflin discloses wherein the customer authentication data comprise one or more of a name, an account number or a personal identification number (PIN). See p. 1, ll. 21-23.
As per claim 7, Staflin discloses wherein the merchant device comprises one or more of a bank teller personal identification number (PIN) terminal, a bank teller display terminal, a point-of-sale device, or a point-of-sale display terminal. See p. 14, ll. 20-24.
As per claim 8, Staflin discloses wherein the customer device comprises one or more of a smart phone, a laptop, a tablet, a wearable device or a personal communication device. See Fig. 1, item 121.
As per claim 9, Staflin discloses displaying a confirmation message on a display of the customer device after successfully authenticating the customer account. See p. 20, ll. 15,16. Staflin does not expressly disclose the message is a welcome message. However, this difference is only found in the non-functional descriptive material and is not functionally involved in the steps recited. The displaying step would be performed the same regardless of what data is on the screen. Thus, this descriptive material will not distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art in terms of patentability, see In re Gulack, 703 F.2d 1381, 1385, 217 USPQ 401, 404 (Fed. Cir. 1983); In re Lowry, 32 F.3d 1579, 32 USPQ2d 1031 (Fed. Cir. 1994). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to display a message regardless of type of data included because such data does not functionally relate to the steps in the method claimed and because of the subjective interpretation of the data does not patentably distinguish the claimed invention.
As per claim 11, Staflin discloses receiving a summary (i.e. confirmation message). See p. 20, ll. 15 and 16. Staflin does not disclose the summary includes a summary of actions executed by one or more of the merchant server or the merchant device. However, this difference is only found in the non-functional descriptive material and is not functionally involved in the steps recited. The receiving step would be performed the same regardless of what data is on the summary. Thus, this descriptive material will not distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art in terms of patentability, see In re Gulack, 703 F.2d 1381, 1385, 217 USPQ 401, 404 (Fed. Cir. 1983); In re Lowry, 32 F.3d 1579, 32 USPQ2d 1031 (Fed. Cir. 1994). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to receive a summary regardless of type of data included because such data does not functionally relate to the steps in the method claimed and because of the subjective interpretation of the data does not patentably distinguish the claimed invention.
As per claim 12, Staflin discloses receiving at the customer device a request for information from the merchant device or the merchant server; and transmitting from the customer device to the merchant device or the merchant server a response to the request for information. See claim 1 above – challenge/request.
Claims 13 and 14 are rejected on the same rationale as claims 1 and 2, respectively.
As per claim 15, Staflin in combination with Thomas and Lo disclose wherein the joint interactive communication session comprises transmitting, by the merchant device, information that is displayed on the teller terminal for concurrent display on the customer mobile device (see claim 1 above).
Claim 16 is rejected on the same rationale as claim 11.
Claims 17 and 18 are rejected on the same rationale as claims 1 and 2, respectively.
Claim 19 is rejected on the same rationale as claim 5.
Claim 20 is rejected on the same rationale as claim 8.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JALATEE WORJLOH whose telephone number is (571)272-6714. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6:00am-2:00pm.
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, John Hayes can be reached at (571) 272-6708. 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.
/Jalatee Worjloh/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3697