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 .
Status of Claims
Applicant filed an amendment on December 26, 2025. Claims 1-20 were pending in the Application. Claims 1, 7-8, 10, and 12 have been amended. Claims 14-20 have been canceled. New claims 21-22 have been added. Claim 1 is the independent claim, the remaining claims depend on claim 1. Thus claims 1-13 and 21-22 are currently pending. After careful and full consideration of Applicant arguments and amendments, the Examiner finds them to be moot and/or not persuasive.
Response to Arguments
In the context of 35 U.S.C. §101, Applicant respectfully disagrees with and respectfully traverses the rejection. Applicant is of the opinion that the claims are statutory and respectfully asserts that “the amended claims provide multiple technological improvements to technical problems arising in the secured payment industry, thus preempting the need for further analysis with regards to §101; Step 2A (Prong One): Applicant's Claims Do Not Recite an Abstract Idea; under Prong One, Applicant's claims do not recite a judicial exception and at best, involve, an abstract idea; the pending claims do not recite a "commercial or legal interaction" or any other "certain method of organizing human activity" as defined by MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(11)(B); providing enhanced fraud protections (for instance, when using a unique access token associated with an entity) is not a "commercial or legal interaction"; under Step 2A (Prong Two): Applicant's Claims Recite a Practical Application; using computer hardware and software to reduce fraud and improve secure transactions is a practical application; the present claims recite an improvement for reducing fraud exposure by making it easier for merchants and financial institutions to isolate and contain suspicious activity at the individual location level; under Step 2B: The Claims, as a Whole, Recite "Significantly More" than the Alleged Abstract Idea; even assuming the pending claims were determined to be directed to a judicial exception, which Applicant does not concede, the claims would still be patent eligible at Step 2B; the claims do amount to more than generally linking the abstract idea to a technological environment; claim 1 recites a specific method of using unique access tokens associated with a geographic location to present and issue a selected arrangement, which, when considered in an ordered combination, are not generally linking the abstract idea to a technological environment; the Office's analysis does not consider the specific requirements in the claimed combination of steps, now further in view of the amendments presented; by dismissing the claim elements as allegedly abstract, and labeling the identified additional elements as known or generic devices individually, the Office failed to fully consider the inventive concept; a proper analysis at Step 2B demonstrates that Applicant's claims recite significantly more because the claims have "additional elements that amounted to significantly more than the abstract idea." MPEP. § 2106.05(d); amended claim 1 has specific additional claim elements that provide significantly more by improving the technology in the field of secure transactions; the present claims are an improvement for reducing fraud exposure by making it easier for merchants and financial institutions to isolate and contain suspicious activity at the individual location level; amended claim 1 recites "significantly more" than the alleged abstract idea and for this additional reason is patent-eligible; the Office Action's Allegation that the Claims Recite a "Commercial Interaction" is Conclusory; while the Office recites and makes reference to many claim elements collectively, the Office does not explain how the claim language of any claim element recites a "commercial interaction" of "location based payment options"; the Office has failed to "identify and evaluate each claim limitation," and instead relied purely on conclusory assertions that the referenced claim elements collectively recite a commercial interaction; and that the Office has not provided a prima facie case to support its conclusion that the claims of the present application are directed to non-statutory subject matter in light of the decision in Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int'l, 134 S. Ct. 2347 (2014).”
Initially, the Examiner would like to point out that the basis of the rejection is Alice, by applying the subject matter eligibility analysis and flowchart according to MPEP § 2106, which applies a two-step framework, earlier set out in Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., 566 U.S. 66 (2012), "for distinguishing patents that claim laws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas from those that claim patent-eligible applications of those concepts." Alice, 573 U.S. at 217.
Under the two-step framework, it must first be determined if "the claims at issue are directed to a patent-ineligible concept." If the claims are determined to be directed to a patent-ineligible concept, e.g., an abstract idea, then the second step of the framework is applied to determine if "the elements of the claim ... contain an "inventive concept" sufficient to 'transform' the claimed abstract idea into a patent-eligible application." (citing Mayo, 566 U.S. at 72-73, 79).
With regard to step one of the Alice framework, we apply a "directed to" two-prong test: 1) evaluate whether the claim recites a judicial exception, and 2) if the claim recites a judicial exception, evaluate whether the claim "applies, relies on, or uses the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that the claim is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the judicial exception," i.e., whether the claim integrates the judicial exception into a practical application. (MPEP §2106.04 II.A.1. and II.B.2.).
The specification, (para 1), provides evidence as to what the claimed invention is directed. In this case, the specification, (para 1), discloses that the invention relates to generating a variety of banking arrangement options with a geographically distinct entity, and is grouped under “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity, commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations)”, in prong one of step 2A. (MPEP §2106.04 II.A.1.).
Claim 1 provides additional evidence, and recites the limitations “providing a unique token at the unique geographic location, wherein the unique token is associated with the entity at the unique geographic location; receiving a request for an arrangement, wherein the request is transmitted from a mobile device associated with a requestor; querying a first database for a first information associated with the requestor; receiving the first information associated with the requestor, wherein the first information includes one or more of a name, address, date of birth, and an identification number; querying, using the first information associated with the requestor, a second database; receiving a second information associated with the requestor from the second database; generating the variety of arrangement options, wherein the variety of arrangement options is determined using one or more of the first information, the second information, and the unique token; presenting the variety of arrangement options to the requestor; receiving an input from the requestor, wherein the input is indicative of a selected arrangement within the variety of arrangement options; querying, using the first information associated with the requestor, a third database; receiving a third information associated with the requestor from the third database; issuing the selected arrangement based on the input from the requestor and the third information, wherein the selected arrangement includes a borrowed amount and repayment terms, and wherein the selected arrangement is issued for use by the requestor with the entity at the unique geographic location; generating a virtual card based on the selected arrangement, wherein the virtual card is added to the mobile device or a point-of-sale device and the virtual card enables transactions initiated by the requestor at the unique geographic location; receiving a signal from a device at the unique geographic location indicating that the virtual card was used by the requestor in the entity at the unique geographic location; and deactivating the virtual card by removing the virtual card from the mobile device's application or marking the virtual card as inactive”, where the italicized claim language represents the abstract idea of “location based payment options”, and the bolded claim language represents the additional elements (MPEP §2106.04 II.A.1.).
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because, when analyzed under prong two of step 2A (MPEP §2106.04 II.A.2.), the additional elements of the claim, such as “the request is transmitted from a mobile device associated with a requestor”, “a first database”, “a second database”, “presenting the variety of arrangement options to the requestor”, “a third database”, “generating a virtual card based on the selected arrangement, wherein the virtual card is added to the mobile device or a point-of-sale device and the virtual card”, “a device”, and “deactivating the virtual card by removing the virtual card from the mobile device's application or marking the virtual card as inactive”, represents the use of a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. Therefore, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application as they do no more than represent a computer performing functions that correspond to implementing the acts of “location based payment options.”
Examiner notes the basis of the rejection was, and is not as any mental process covering performance in the mind, but classified as an abstract idea, “location based payment options”, grouped under “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity, commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations)”.
With respect to the additional elements operating in a non-conventional and non-generic way and reflecting an improvement to a particular technological environment, the cited additional elements represent the use of a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. Therefore, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application as they do no more than represent a computer performing functions that correspond to implementing the acts of “location based payment options.” The claims are not directed to improving computers or related technologies, but improving the method for “location based payment options”. For potential improvement in an abstract idea, “location based payment options”, it is important to keep in mind that an improvement in the abstract idea itself (e.g. a location based payment options concept) is not an improvement in technology. (MPEP § 2106.04(d)(1)). Therefore, claim 1 is non-statutory.
Finally, Examiner notes the basis of the rejection is Alice, by applying the subject matter eligibility analysis and flowchart according to MPEP § 2106. And, based on this standard, the claims are non-statutory, and correctly rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
In the context of 35 U.S.C. § 102, in the Non-Final Rejection Office Action dated September 12, 2025, Applicant has adequately amended to overcome the current rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102 by amending claim 1 to recite “generating a virtual card based on the selected arrangement, wherein the virtual card is added to the mobile device or a point-of-sale device and the virtual card enables transactions initiated by the requestor at the unique geographic location; receiving a signal from a device at the unique geographic location indicating that the virtual card was used by the requestor in the entity at the unique geographic location; and deactivating the virtual card by removing the virtual card from the mobile device's application or marking the virtual card as inactive”. Therefore, Anderson fails to disclose or suggest the newly amended subject matter. Based on the amended claim 1, Examiner has rescinded the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102 for claims 1-11, and now rejects claims 1-13 and 21-22 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
In the context of 35 U.S.C. § 103, Applicant respectfully submits that, solely to advance prosecution and without acquiescing to the rejection, Applicant amends claim 1 to further distinguish the claims over the cited references. None of the cited references teach or suggest the newly recited claim elements. Amended independent claim 1 now recites, for example "generating a virtual card based on the selected arrangement, wherein the virtual card is added to the mobile device or a point-of -sale device and the virtual card enables transactions initiated by the requestor at the unique geographic location," "receiving a signal from a device at the unique geographic location indicating that the virtual card was used by the requestor in the entity at the unique geographic location," and "deactivating the virtual card by removing the virtual card from the mobile device's application or marking the virtual card as inactive." Anderson and Jung do not teach or suggest at least these newly recited elements of amended claim 1 from which claims 2-14 depend.
Examiner finds the applicant arguments moot in view of new grounds of rejection, and therefore, amended claim 1 is not patentable. Amended claim 1 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C §103 in the analysis below, and is therefore, not patentable in view of Matthews (US 20230101469 A1) now applying to the applicable amended sections for claim 1. Therefore, amended claim 1 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Claims 2-13 and 21-22, which depend on claim 1, also stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The current rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 for claims 1-13 and 21-22 is maintained.
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 1-13 and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
In the instant case, claims 1-13 and 21-22 are directed to a “non-transitory computer readable medium”. Therefore, these claims are directed to one of the four statutory categories of invention.
Claim 1 recites “location based payment options”, which is a form of commercial and legal interaction (i.e., organizing human activity), and therefore, an abstract idea. Specifically, the claim recites “providing a unique token at the unique geographic location, wherein the unique token is associated with the entity at the unique geographic location; receiving a request for an arrangement, wherein the request is transmitted from a mobile device associated with a requestor; querying a first database for a first information associated with the requestor; receiving the first information associated with the requestor, wherein the first information includes one or more of a name, address, date of birth, and an identification number; querying, using the first information associated with the requestor, a second database; receiving a second information associated with the requestor from the second database; generating the variety of arrangement options, wherein the variety of arrangement options is determined using one or more of the first information, the second information, and the unique token; presenting the variety of arrangement options to the requestor; receiving an input from the requestor, wherein the input is indicative of a selected arrangement within the variety of arrangement options; querying, using the first information associated with the requestor, a third database; receiving a third information associated with the requestor from the third database; issuing the selected arrangement based on the input from the requestor and the third information, wherein the selected arrangement includes a borrowed amount and repayment terms, and wherein the selected arrangement is issued for use by the requestor with the entity at the unique geographic location; generating a virtual card based on the selected arrangement, wherein the virtual card is added to the mobile device or a point-of-sale device and the virtual card enables transactions initiated by the requestor at the unique geographic location; receiving a signal from a device at the unique geographic location indicating that the virtual card was used by the requestor in the entity at the unique geographic location; and deactivating the virtual card by removing the virtual card from the mobile device's application or marking the virtual card as inactive”. The abstract idea is in italics, and the additional elements are in bold. (MPEP § 2106.04 II.A.1.).
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because, when analyzed under prong two of step 2A (MPEP §2106.04 II.A.2.), the additional element of the claim, such as “the request is transmitted from a mobile device associated with a requestor”, “a first database”, “a second database”, “presenting the variety of arrangement options to the requestor”, “a third database”, “generating a virtual card based on the selected arrangement, wherein the virtual card is added to the mobile device or a point-of-sale device and the virtual card”, “a device”, and “deactivating the virtual card by removing the virtual card from the mobile device's application or marking the virtual card as inactive”, represent the use of a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. Therefore, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application as they do no more than represent a computer performing functions that correspond to implementing the acts of “location based payment options.”
When analyzed under step 2B (MPEP 2106.05 I.A.), the claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception itself. Viewed as a whole, the combination of elements recited in the claim merely describes the concept of “location based payment options” using computer technology (e.g., “a non-transitory computer readable medium” and “at least one processor”). Therefore, the use of these additional elements do no more than employ a computer as a tool to implement the abstract idea. And as the computer does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea, they do not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field. Therefore, claim 1 is non-statutory.
Dependent claims 2-13 and 21-22 further describe the abstract idea of “location based payment options”, which is insufficient to overcome the rejection of claim 1.
Dependent claims 2-13 and 21-22 do not recite any new additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, and that do no more than represent a computer performing functions that correspond to implementing the acts of “location based payment options”, when analyzed under Step 2A, Prong Two.
Under Step 2B, when taken, alone or in ordered combination, do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea alone.
Hence, claims 1-13 and 21-22 are not patent eligible.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U. S. 1. 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103 are summarized as follows:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-11 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anderson et al (U. S. Patent Application Publication No. 20230004951 A1), herein referred to as Anderson and in further view of Matthews et al (U. S. Patent Application Publication No. 20230087384 A1), herein referred to as Matthews.
As per claim 1, Anderson discloses a non-transitory computer readable medium (FIG. 9, item 902; para 267, “FIG. 9, portions of the technology for providing a communication composed of computer-readable and computer-executable instructions that reside, for example, in non-transitory computer-readable medium for storing instructions of a computer system …”; para 268, “… As shown in FIG. 9, computer system 900 of FIG. 9 is well adapted to having peripheral computer read-able media 902 such as, for example, an external hard drive, a compact disc, a flash drive, a thumb drive, a wireless radio enabled device, and the like coupled thereto …”) containing instructions that, when executed by at least one processor (FIG. 9, item 906A, 906B, 906C; para 269, “… a processor 906A coupled to bus 904 for processing information and instructions … FIG. 9, system 900 is also well suited to a multi-processor environment in which a plurality of processors 906A, 906B, and 906C are present … system 900 is also well suited to having a single processor such as, for example, processor 906A. Processors 906A, 906B, and 906C may be any of various types of microprocessors. Computer system 900 also includes data storage features such as a computer usable volatile memory 908, e.g., random access memory (RAM), coupled to bus 904 for storing information and instructions for processors 906A, 906B, and 906C …”; para 270, “System 900 also includes computer usable non-volatile memory 910, e.g., read only memory (ROM), coupled to bus 904 for storing static information and instruc-tions for processors 906A, 906B, and 906C … in system 900 is a data storage unit 912 (e.g., a magnetic disk drive, optical disk drive, solid state drive (SSD), and the like) coupled to bus 904 for storing information and instructions …”), cause the at least one processor to generate a variety of arrangement options for use with an entity at a unique geographic location, the instructions comprising:
providing a unique token at the unique geographic location, wherein the unique token is associated with the entity at the unique geographic location (FIG. 8B, items 803, 851, 852, 853, 854; para 169, “… the transaction could also include information from the device such as customer biometric information, location information (e.g., provided by GPS 118), the transaction time, the transaction date, etc. … the location information provided by the mobile device 110 will include time and date stamp information … the location, time and/or date could be obtained from the POS 104, a combination of the customer's mobile device 110 and the POS 104, etc. …”; para 170, “… for the transaction to occur, BNPL product pass 170 would be validated using the internet connection from the POS 104, the biometric infor-mation for the customer (as provided via a token or the like) from the customer's mobile device 110, the location obtained from GPS 118, the time, the date of the transaction initiation, the mobile device identification number, etc. …”; para 175, “… BNPL offer 105 is provided via a beacon such as one or more of beacons 103-1 through 103-n. In another embodiment, BNPL offer 105 is provided by an application on the customer's mobile device 110 after the customer's mobile device 110 is determined to be in store 100, within range of beacon 103-1 and/or 103-n. In yet another embodiment, the offer is provided on the customer's mobile device 110 when a location capability of the customer's mobile device 110 determines that the customer 101 is located near store 100 …”; para 232, “With reference now to 851 of FIG. 8B … obtains authorization for the BNPL product provider 230 to access location information 803 about the BNPL application …”; para 233, “With reference now to 852 of FIG. 8B, one embodiment receives, at the computer system location information 803 about the BNPL application … the location information 803 generated by a positioning system tracking such as GPS 118 on the mobile device 110 …”; para 238, “At 854, location information 803 includes real-time location information obtained from the positioning system. Real-time location information would be location information 803 that is generated in real time by the positioning system. The real-time location information would be constantly replaced as location information 803 generated by the positioning system received at the computer system, e.g., location information evaluator 804 ...”);
receiving a request for an arrangement, wherein the request is transmitted from a mobile device associated with a requestor (FIG. 7, item 705; para 174, “At 705, one embodiment receives an inquiry about a BNPL product for a customer 101, the inquiry including identification information for the customer … the inquiry is initiated when the customer interacts with BNPL offer 105 (of FIG. 1) which may be provided by the entrance 102 to store 100, in a section of the store such as a furniture, clothing, shoes or the like … BNPL offer 105 may be presented on a physical item such as a poster, or the like and include a visual code such as a barcode, QR code, or the like. As such, BNPL offer 105 may be scanned by the customer 101 with the customer's mobile device …”);
querying a first database for a first information associated with the requestor (FIG. 3, item 16; para 77, “… the device ID 216 and user ID 218 information to perform a proprietary search 5 of at least one proprietary database 16 … the proprietary database 16 may be one or more databases such as a credit accounts database, or the like, that store a company's private database such as an Alliance Data Legacy database or the like. Proprietary database 16 will include user specific information 223 for customers that have existing accounts with the company, have previously applied for an account, or the like …”; para 80, “… the search would use an internal account holder proprietary database 16 to see if the customer has another account within the shared information database …”);
receiving the first information associated with the requestor, wherein the first information includes one or more of a name, address, date of birth, and an identification number (FIG. 3, 5A, items 220, 223, 520; para 71, “User ID 218 can be the customer's identification information such as, name, zip code, social security number or portion thereof, driver's license number or portion thereof, or the like that is used to identify a specific customer …”; para 75, “… user specific information engine 220 will use device ID 216 and user ID 218 to obtain user specific information 223 to prepopulate an electronic form such as a BNPL application. In general, user specific information 223 could be at least two of: a name and full or partial address, a driver's license number, a social security number, or the like …”; para 86, “… if a match is made, then the user specific information 223 can be used to prepopulate a portion of the application, e.g., name, address, city, state, zip, mobile device number, email, etc. …”; para 118, “… user specific information 223 could be one or more of: a name and full or partial address, a driver's license number, a social security number, an exist-ing credit account, or the like …”);
querying, using the first information associated with the requestor, a second database (FIG. 3, 5B, items 26, 524; para 84, “If no user specific information 223 is found during the proprietary search 5 or if the found user specific infor-mation 223 cannot be validated, then the device ID 216 and user ID 218 are passed on to a secondary search 25. At secondary search 25, a second source search engine 28 will search at least one secondary source database 26. One example of secondary source database 26 is a reverse phone number look up. However, other secondary source databases may be searched such as, but not limited to: social media sites, search engines, online public and/or private records, reverse name and phone number engines, and the like. In one embodiment, the user specific information 223 may be obtained by performing a secondary source database 26 search with the user ID 218 and the device ID 216 …”; para 85, “the secondary search 25 may be for example, a real-time call to a reverse phone look-up product to try and locate the customer … reverse phone look-up products provide accurate and current customer telephone information. In many cases, the data is updated regularly from a broad range of sources, including regional bell operating companies, white pages and proprietary sources. … also integrates validation and authentication aspects that add further benefits to append address information for a customer. In general, validation and authentication aspects match customer name and zip code information that was returned from the reverse phone look-up, against data from a secondary source to return full address data …”);
receiving a second information associated with the requestor from the second database (para 86, “If the customer is found 36, then the user specific information 223 is returned via return information 12 to user specific information engine 220. If no user specific information 223 is found from the secondary search 25, then no user specific information 223 will be pre-populated into the forms. That is, the user specific information engine 220 will receive a return empty 39. However, if a match is made, then the user specific information 223 can be used to prepopulate a portion of the application, e.g., name, address, city, state, zip, mobile device number, email, etc. …”);
generating the variety of arrangement options, wherein the variety of arrangement options is determined using one or more of the first information, the second information, and the unique token (FIG. 7, item 715; para 68, “A number of different options may be available to respond to the BNPL offer 105 … the response may be in the form of a message interaction, as shown and described in further detail in FIGS. 6A through 6F … the response to the BNPL offer 105 requires the customer to provide a device ID 216 and a user ID 218 …”; para 131, “… the BNPL product includes a number of options such as payment amount per payment and the payment timeframe … if the customer is looking at making a 500-dollar transaction, they could be offered a BNPL l that is 5 monthly payments of 100 dollars, BNPL 2 that is 10 monthly payments of 50 dollars, BNPLX that is 50% due at transaction and then some number of weekly, bi-weekly, or monthly payments to cover the remaining 250 dollars …”; para 132, “… one or more different BNPL product options are presented to the customer as one or more payment scenarios …, the BNPL product can be offered to the customer with a number of different payment scenarios such that the customer can select the payment amount and schedule, and use the BNPL product with the appropriate terms to complete the transaction. E.g., one or more optional payback schedules including amounts, number of payments, different interest rates, available offers, discounts, and the like …”; para 135, “… the different transaction payment scenarios may include different offers dependent upon the customer's credit history … a customer with a good credit history could be offered a BNPL product that has a no interest plan … depending upon the goals of the BNPL product provider 230, the BNPL product provider 230 may decide to weigh the BNPL product with respect to the existing customer credit account in order to drive one or more different customers toward the BNPL product. In one embodiment, the weighing may be based upon a customer's credit history, a brand or retailer's desires, available incentives, and the like …”);
presenting the variety of arrangement options to the requestor (FIG. 7, item 720; para 131, “… the BNPL product includes a number of options such as payment amount per payment and the payment timeframe … if the customer is looking at making a 500-dollar transaction, they could be offered a BNPL l that is 5 monthly payments of 100 dollars, BNPL 2 that is 10 monthly payments of 50 dollars, BNPLX that is 50% due at transaction and then some number of weekly, bi-weekly, or monthly payments to cover the remaining 250 dollars …”; para 132, “… one or more different BNPL product options are presented to the customer as one or more payment scenarios …, the BNPL product can be offered to the customer with a number of different payment scenarios such that the customer can select the payment amount and schedule, and use the BNPL product with the appropriate terms to complete the transaction. E.g., one or more optional payback schedules including amounts, number of payments, different interest rates, available offers, discounts, and the like …”; para 144, “… a reduced monthly payment amount, will provide a limit as to the longest allowable term, have a predefined minimum monthly payment amount, or the like … the reduced monthly payment amount could provide a BNPL product term range, a minimum monthly payment range, or the like … when the customer looks at the different options, the appropriate BNPL product fee will be incorporated into the BNPL product information including payment option terms and/or conditions 612 …”);
receiving an input from the requestor, wherein the input is indicative of a selected arrangement within the variety of arrangement options (FIG. 7, items 725; para 181, “At 725, one embodiment selects, via a customer input to the mobile device 110, one of the plurality of BNPL payment scenarios with associated terms …”);
querying, using the first information associated with the requestor, a third database (FIG. 4, item 227; para 93, “… customer account identifier 261 accesses database 227 which stores a plurality of customer credit accounts and utilizes the user specific infor-mation 223 in order to identify any accounts related to the customer … customer account identifier 261 accesses database 227 via cloud 226 …”);
receiving a third information associated with the requestor from the third database (FIG. 4, item 227; para 94, “… database 227 stores a plurality of customer credit accounts, a plurality of customer reward accounts and/or offers, coupons, and the like. Customer account identifier 261 searches database 227 for one or more customer accounts (e.g., credit accounts, reward accounts, and/or offers, coupons, and the like) that are held by the identified customer. When any customer credit accounts are found, they are provided by the customer account identifier 261 to BNPL product builder 262 which links the one or more customer accounts with the BNPL product pass 170 information to build a customer data file …”);
issuing the selected arrangement based on the input from the requestor and the third information, wherein the selected arrangement includes a borrowed amount and repayment terms, and wherein the selected arrangement is issued for use by the requestor with the entity at the unique geographic location (FIG. 7, item 735; para 183, “At 735 … from the mobile device 110 and to the BNPL product provider 230 computing system, the agreement with the associated terms of the selected BNPL payment scenarios … the associated terms include an interest rate, a reward information, a time period for repayment, a predefined payment amount, a recurring payment due date within the time period for repayment, and the like …”); …
Anderson does not specifically disclose, however, Matthews discloses generating a virtual card based on the selected arrangement (FIG. 1, item 104; para 69, “Virtual card generator 104 may comprise one or more processors that are configured to receive requests for virtual cards, generate the requested virtual cards, and transmit the requested virtual cards to the requesting device …”; para 70, “… components 116-128 may cooperate to generate virtual cards and profiles for various users and provision the virtual cards to provisioning device 102 to forward to various client devices, such as client devices 106 and/or 108 … ”; para 71, “Performance of method 200 may enable the data processing system to operate as a software-as-a-service system that can receive requests to generate virtual cards, generate the requested virtual cards, and provision the generated virtual cards to the requesting devices. The data processing system may generate the virtual cards such that the cards may be scanned at a point-of-sale terminal or used online to perform transactions … the data processing system may electronically generate and provision cards and determine whether to allow transactions to occur via the provisioned cards …”; para 74, “… the request may be a bulk request to create virtual cards for multiple individuals. The bulk request may include information that the data processing system can use to generate virtual cards for the individuals … the data processing system may receive identifications of multiple individuals and information for each individual to use to create or generate virtual cards … such requests may include a spreadsheet that includes the data to include for the virtual cards included in rows that each correspond to a different virtual card … the requests may be data that was input into forms on an application (e.g., a web application). The request may include the same or different rules or parameters between the requested virtual cards …”), wherein the virtual card is added to the mobile device or a point-of-sale device and the virtual card enables transactions initiated by the requestor at the unique geographic location (FIG. 4, item 400; para 113, “FIG. 4, an illustration of a sequence 400 for storing a virtual card in a virtual wallet is shown … Sequence 400 may include an application that receives a request to add a virtual card to a wallet in the application. The application then communicates with a software developer kit with data for a virtual card being added to the wallet. The software development kit then communicates with a validation server to validate that the data for the virtual card may be stored in the digital wallet and then an encryption server that uses encryption logic to encrypt the data of the virtual card so the virtual card can be stored… ”; FIG. 5, item 500; para 114,“… Sequences 500 may include a sequence for assigning a virtual card to a specific subscriber (e.g., a provisioning entity) with a subscriber identifier, a sequence for viewing information about the card such as the card security code based on the subscriber identifier, a sequence for adding the virtual card to a digital wallet, and a sequence for deactivating the virtual card …”);
receiving a signal from a device at the unique geographic location indicating that the virtual card was used by the requestor in the entity at the unique geographic location (para 171,“… The transaction server may store the profiles that correspond to the virtual cards, thus enabling the transaction server to either enable or restrict the transactions from occurring. For each transaction, the transaction server may send an indication of the transaction back to the provisioner's device with data for the transaction to inform the provisioners of any transactions that occurred using the provisioned virtual cards…”; para 225, “… responsive to determining the transaction does comply with the use restrictions of the virtual card account, at operation 3630, the data processing system updates the virtual card account. The data processing system may update the virtual card account by inserting an indication that the virtual card account was used to complete a transaction into the virtual card account or by otherwise incrementing a counter that indicates the number of transactions the virtual card account has been used to complete …”); and
deactivating the virtual card by removing the virtual card from the mobile device's application or marking the virtual card as inactive (FIG. 5, item 500; para 114,“… Sequences 500 may include a sequence for assigning a virtual card to a specific subscriber (e.g., a provisioning entity) with a subscriber identifier, a sequence for viewing information about the card such as the card security code based on the subscriber identifier, a sequence for adding the virtual card to a digital wallet, and a sequence for deactivating the virtual card …”; para 177, “… A provisioner may access and view user interface 220 to view information about a provisioned virtual card and/or deactivate the virtual card so it cannot be used … a provisioner may select a deactivate button from user interface 2200 that will change a setting in the profile that corresponds to the virtual card to indicate to restrict or stop any transactions that are performed using the virtual card … when the provisioner selects the deactivate button, a virtual card generation and provisioning system (e.g., virtual card generator 104) may transmit a signal to the mobile device that stores the virtual card to remove the virtual card from memory, make the virtual card inaccessible, and/or to otherwise update a setting on the device so the virtual card cannot be used for purchases …”).
Matthews discloses virtual card generation and provisioning for bulk requests. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include virtual card generation and provisioning for bulk requests, as in Matthews, to improve and/or enhance the technology for providing a buy now pay later product to a credit account holder, as in Anderson, because it would amount to combining elements that in the combination would perform the same function as they functioned separately. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have been motivated to combine the references to provide a computer system that enables companies to provision virtual cards, as data packets to individuals, that can be used according to companies’ policies by providing an accessible remote device that can generate and provision virtual cards to a company accessing the system, and including rules and policies about how, when, and/or where the virtual cards may be used to make purchases.
As per claim 2, Anderson and Matthews disclose all the limitations of claim 1. Anderson further discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 1, wherein the first database is a collection of requestor account data (FIG. 3, item 16; para 77, “… information to perform a proprietary search 5 of at least one proprietary database 16. In general, the proprietary database 16 may be one or more databases such as a credit accounts database, or the like, that store a company's private database such as an Alliance Data Legacy database or the like. Proprietary database 16 will include user specific information 223 for customers that have existing accounts with the company, have previously applied for an account, or the like …”).
As per claim 3, Anderson and Matthews discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Anderson further discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 1, wherein the selected arrangement has a term of 12 months or less (para 131, “… the BNPL product includes a number of options such as payment amount per payment and the payment timeframe … if the customer is looking at making a 500-dollar transaction, they could be offered a BNPL l that is 5 monthly payments of 100 dollars, BNPL2 that is 10 monthly payments of 50 dollars, BNPLX that is 50% due at transaction and then some number of weekly, bi-weekly, or monthly payments to cover the remaining 250 dollars …”; para 142, “… if the customer pays off the BNPL product in 2 months, there would be no interest charged and the BNPL product fee would be reduced to 5 dollars. If that opportunity is accepted, the amount of the BNPL product would be 505 dollars (e.g., 500 dollars+5-dollar fee) broken down over 2 months thereby resulting in a monthly payment of 252.50 per month for the next 2 months …”; para 145, “… if the customer would like to make monthly payments of 50 dollars toward the BNPL product, the customer would select the 50-dollar payment option and the modified BNPL product information including payment option terms and/or conditions 612 would be presented to the customer … when the customer chooses to pay 50 dollars a month toward the BNPL product, the BNPL product fee would be increased by a defined amount and presented to the customer along with the terms and conditions … the amount of the one-time BNPL product would be 520 dollars (e.g., 500 dollars+l0-dollar fee+l0 dollars in interest). Since the customer has selected to pay 50 dollars a month, the customer's BNPL product term would be 11 months, with 10 months of 50-dollar payments and the 11th month being a 20-dollar payment …”).
As per claim 4, Anderson and Matthews discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Anderson further discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 1, wherein the second database is associated with a credit collecting organization (FIG. 4, item 241; para 88, “… credit screener 240 accesses a credit reporting agency database 241, such as a credit reporting agency, via cloud 226 to determine credit information for the customer based on the user specific information 223 …”).
As per claim 5, Anderson and Matthews discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Anderson further discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 1, wherein the second information is a measure of the requestor's ability to obtain goods or services before payment (para 90, “… after the customer passes the credit screening then BNPL product provider 230 provides an application for a BNPL product to the customer's mobile device … BNPL product provider 230 populates the application for the BNPL product with the user specific information 223. That is, BNPL product provider 230 will place the user specific information 223 provided by the user specific information engine 220 into the forms that are provided to the customer's mobile device. By populating the forms prior to presenting them to the customer, the abandonment rate will be improved as the application pro-cess will be shortened due to the pre-filling of the customer's information into the application forms …”).
As per claim 6, Anderson and Matthews discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Anderson further discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 1, wherein the third database is associated with a credit collecting organization (FIG. 4, item 227; para 93, “… customer account identifier 261 accesses database 227 which stores a plurality of customer credit accounts and utilizes the user specific infor-mation 223 in order to identify any accounts related to the customer … customer account identifier 261 accesses database 227 via cloud 226 …”).
As per claim 7, Anderson and Matthews discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Anderson further discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 1, wherein the third information is a measure of the requestor's ability to obtain goods or services before payment (FIG. 5A, item 530; para 149, “With reference now to 530 of FIG. SA, once the customer passes the credit screening, one embodiment pro-vides the BNPL product pass 170 to the customer … at FIG. 6D, an embodiment of a screen capture 630 of the identified customer's BNPL product 631 information and a ready for purchase feature such as code 632 (which may be a visual code, an aural code, and/or a combination thereof) as viewed on a customer's mobile device 110 is shown in accordance with an embodiment …”).
As per claim 8, Anderson and Matthews discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Anderson further discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 1, the instructions further comprising generating a data structure associated with the requestor, wherein the data structure represents at least one table, and wherein the at least one table is determined using one or more of the first information and the second information (FIG. 3, 4, 5B, items 16, 216, 218, 241, 522, 523; para 77, “… information to perform a proprietary search 5 of at least one proprietary database 16 … the proprietary database 16 may be one or more databases such as a credit accounts database, or the like, that store a company's private database such as an Alliance Data Legacy database or the like. Proprietary database 16 will include user specific information 223 for customers that have existing accounts with the company, have previously applied for an account, or the like …”; para 78, “… the proprietary search 5 will only search a database related to a specific company … if the BNPL product provider 230 is a specific company, e.g., Nash's skate and bike emporium, then in a company specific database search, only the existing cus-tomer information related to Nash's skate and bike empo-rium will be searched … a check is performed to see if the customer has an existing PLCC account, e.g., is already an existing customer in the database …”, para 79, “… if the proprietary search 5 is for a group of companies, a shared information database, or the like, then all of the customer information in the databases may be searched for a match with the device ID 216 or the user ID 218 … if the database includes Nash's skate and bike, Mike's hardware, and Tarrin's dress stores, and all three companies are sharing information, then the search would encompass all three store's databases of information …”; para 80, “… the search would use an internal account holder proprietary database 16 to see if the customer has another account within the shared information database …”; para 89, “Credit screener 240 will analyze the customer's credit information obtained from the credit reporting agency database 241 to determine if the customer passes the credit criteria. If the customer does not pass the credit screening process, no further action is taken …”; para 119, “… At 522 of FIG. 5B, one embodiment uses the device ID 216 and user ID 218 information to perform a proprietary search 5 of a propri-etary database 16. At 523 of FIG. 5B, in one embodiment, user specific information 223 that is found in the proprietary database 16 will be verified using a confidence factor threshold …”).
As per claim 9, Anderson and Matthews discloses all the limitations of claims 1 and 8. Anderson further discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 8, wherein receiving the data structure prompts generating the variety of arrangement options (FIG. 6A, 6B, items 610, 611, 612; para 103, “FIG. 6A is a block diagram of a BNPL offer 105 shown in accordance with an embodiment. FIG. 6B is a screen capture 610 of a BNPL application including a customer's credit account information 611, the BNPL product information including payment option terms and/or conditions 612, and an apply or place order 615 input, as viewed on a customer's mobile device 110 in accordance with an embodiment …”; para 124, “… BNPL product information including payment option terms and/or conditions 612 describes the payment plan that is established and agreed upon by the customer. In one embodiment, the BNPL product information including payment option terms and/or conditions 612 will take an initial payment at the time of the transaction, and then the rest of the payments for the purchase are automatically taken out as installment pay-ments from the initial account provided based on the cus-tomer accepted terms in the BNPL agreement …”; para 125, “… included in BNPL product information including payment option terms and/or condi-tions 612 is an autopayment scenario. In one embodiment, the autopayment will be prefilled by the system using the customer's credit account information 611. For example, the offer would be to obtain the BNPL product and make the payments automatically from the customer's credit account. If the customer does not want to set up the autopay, then in one embodiment, the BNPL application process is stopped and no BNPL product is obtained …”; para 131, “… the BNPL product includes a number of options such as payment amount per payment and the payment timeframe … if the customer is looking at making a 500-dollar transaction, they could be offered a BNPL l that is 5 monthly payments of 100 dollars, BNPL 2 that is 10 monthly payments of 50 dollars, BNPLX that is 50% due at transaction and then some number of weekly, bi-weekly, or monthly payments to cover the remaining 250 dollars …”; para 132, “… one or more different BNPL product options are presented to the customer as one or more payment scenarios. In other words, the BNPL product can be offered to the customer with a number of different payment scenarios such that the customer can select the payment amount and schedule, and use the BNPL product with the appropriate terms to complete the transaction. E.g., one or more optional payback schedules including amounts, num-ber of payments, different interest rates, available offers, discounts, and the like …”).
As per claim 10, Anderson and Matthews discloses all the limitations of claims 1 and 8. Anderson further discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 8, wherein the variety of arrangement options are generated by the at least one processor and further based on the at least one table (FIG. 6B, item 611, 612; para 120, “With reference now to FIG. 6B, a screen capture 610 of a BNPL application including a customer's credit account information 611, the BNPL product information including payment option terms and/or conditions 612, and an apply or place order 615 input, as viewed on a customer's mobile device 110 …”; para 122, “… the customer identifies the account, e.g., customer's credit account information 611, to be used to obtain payments therefrom for the BNPL product … when the customer has a number of existing accounts (such as a co-brand credit account, a PLCC account, a UPLCC account, an installment loan, or the like), the customer will have the option to select/elect which account will be used … when the customer has a number of existing accounts (such as a co-brand credit account, a PLCC account, a UPLCC account, an installment loan, or the like), the BNPL producer 360 will automatically select/elect which account will be used …”; para 141, “If the customer chooses to review the opportunities offered by the optional changes to the BNPL product infor-mation including payment option terms and/or conditions 612, the customer will move to the modify one or more aspects thereof … the customer will be able to review offers, additional fees, additional opportunities, and the like available by selecting a non-default monthly payment amount (or length of the BNPL product payback schedule) …”; para 143, “ … instead of obtaining a discount by reducing the BNPL product term, the customer could select to modify the payment options by extending the BNPL product term and obtain a reduced monthly payment amount … extending the BNPL product term will also result in a larger cost than the cost included in the BNPL product information, including payment option terms and/or conditions 612 …”; para 144, “ … a reduced monthly payment amount, will provide a limit as to the longest allowable term, have a predefined minimum monthly payment amount, or the like … the reduced monthly payment amount could provide a BNPL product term range, a mini-mum monthly payment range, or the like … when the customer looks at the different options, the appropriate BNPL product fee will be incorporated into the BNPL product information including payment option terms and/or conditions 612 …”; para 145, “… if the customer would like to make monthly payments of 50 dollars toward the BNPL product, the customer would select the 50-dollar payment option and the modified BNPL product information including payment option terms and/or conditions 612 would be presented to the customer …”).
As per claim 11, Anderson and Matthews discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Anderson further discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 1, wherein the generating the variety of arrangement options is further based on a monetary value designated by the requestor (para 129, “… the due at transaction time percentage can be a specific amount, e.g., 25% for example, or it could be based on the purchase price and the total number of monthly payments … if the transac-tion is 500 dollars, the customer could choose a BNPL product with 5 equal payments such that the first payment due at time of purchase is 100 dollars and then there will be four additional payments taken out at the agreed upon payment schedule …”; para 131, “… the BNPL product includes a number of options such as payment amount per payment and the payment timeframe … if the customer is looking at making a 500-dollar transaction, they could be offered a BNPL l that is 5 monthly payments of 100 dollars, BNPL2 that is 10 monthly payments of 50 dollars, BNPLX that is 50% due at transaction and then some number of weekly, bi-weekly, or monthly payments to cover the remaining 250 dollars …”; para 145, “… if the customer would like to make monthly payments of 50 dollars toward the BNPL product, the customer would select the 50-dollar payment option and the modified BNPL product information including payment option terms and/or conditions 612 would be presented to the customer … when the customer chooses to pay 50 dollars a month toward the BNPL product, the BNPL product fee would be increased by a defined amount and presented to the customer along with the terms and conditions … the amount of the one-time BNPL product would be 520 dollars (e.g., 500 dollars+l0-dollar fee+l0 dollars in interest). Since the customer has selected to pay 50 dollars a month, the customer's BNPL product term would be 11 months, with 10 months of 50-dollar payments and the 11th month being a 20-dollar payment …”; para 147, “… the amount of the one-time BNPL product would be 520 dollars (e.g., 500 dollars+ 10-dollar fee+ 10 dollars in interest). Since the customer has selected a BNPL product term of 10 months, the monthly payment would be 52 dollars per month …”).
As per claim 22, Anderson and Matthews discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Anderson further discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 1, wherein presenting the variety of arrangement options to the requestor includes an interactive user interface that allows the requestor to select a desired arrangement amount using a slider or input box (FIG. 6A, 6B; para 103, “FIG. 6A is a block diagram of a BNPL offer 105 shown in accordance with an embodiment. FIG. 6B is a screen capture 610 of a BNPL application including a customer's credit account information 611, the BNPL prod-uct information including payment option terms and/or conditions 612, and an apply or place order 615 input, as viewed on a customer's mobile device 110 in accordance with an embodiment …”; para 120, “With reference now to FIG. 6B, a screen capture 610 of a BNPL application including a customer's credit account information 611, the BNPL product information including payment option terms and/or conditions 612, and an apply or place order 615 input, as viewed on a customer's mobile device 110 is shown in accordance with an embodiment …”; para 141, “If the customer chooses to review the opportunities offered by the optional changes to the BNPL product information including payment option terms and/or conditions 612, the customer will move to the modify one or more aspects thereof … the customer will be able to review offers, additional fees, additional opportunities, and the like available by selecting a non-default monthly payment amount (or length of the BNPL product payback schedule) …”).
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anderson et al (U. S. Patent Application Publication No. 20230004951 A1), herein referred to as Anderson, in view of Matthews et al (U. S. Patent Application Publication No. 20230087384 A1), herein referred to as Matthews, and in further view of Jung et al (U. S. Patent Application Publication No. 20070136185 A1), herein referred to as Jung.
As per claim 12, Anderson and Matthews disclose all the limitations of claim 1. Anderson and Matthews do not specifically disclose, however, Jung discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 1, wherein the selected arrangement is presented by the at least one processor and as a virtual card (FIG. 4, 10, items 190, 192, 406; para 83, “In some instances the virtual card features such as credit terms, payment terms, penalties, benefits, and the like may be selected by the user (block 190). In other instances a program may select the virtual card features (block 192), which features may be determined from stored application data (block 194) that is evaluated by the program (block 196). The virtual card features that are selected for each user are stored (block 198) for future reference. Where virtual account terms for a virtual card are being programmed for a new user, such programming may be based on user demo-graphic information …”; para 106, “The virtual charge card server 402 includes various predetermined data records as well as other dynamically updated records that are used by the server to help provide virtual credit services based on different types of credit arrangements and accounts. Exemplary categories of records available to the virtual charge card server 402 include user ID data and related individual virtual card terms 406, user demographic parameters 408, user ID virtual account status data 410 (e.g., entity/person owed, compensation already received, and remaining balance due), virtual account statements 412, user ID performance records 414, and bench-mark standards for virtual card usage 416 …”).
Jung discloses disposition of proprietary virtual rights. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include disposition of proprietary virtual rights, as in Jung; and to include virtual card generation and provisioning for bulk requests, as in Matthews, to improve and/or enhance the technology for providing a buy now pay later product to a credit account holder, as in Anderson, because it would amount to combining elements that in the combination would perform the same function as they functioned separately. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have been motivated to combine the references to provide methods and systems using a virtual card with buy now pay later (BNPL) services that provide enhanced security, as it protects the user’s core financial data from merchants and potential data breaches, and offers greater control over spending by allowing the user to set limits for each transaction; and increases the reach of the BNPL services, as the user can use the virtual card to make purchases at almost any online or even in-store merchant that doesn’t partner directly with the BPNL provider.
As per claim 13, Anderson and Matthews disclose all the limitations of claims 1 and 12. Anderson further discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 12, wherein the virtual card is used for one of an online transaction and an in-person transaction (para 32, “… the co-branded credit account can have an associated virtual card that can be stored in a mobile wallet or otherwise digitally stored by the customer and includes the credit account information required for a purchase … the co-branded credit account can have both a physical card and a virtual card …”; para 34, “… the PLCC account can have an associated physical card, e.g., a credit card that is carried by a customer and includes the credit account information required for a purchase … the PLCC account can have an associated virtual card that can be stored in a mobile wallet or otherwise digitally stored by the customer and includes the credit account information required for a purchase … the PLCC account can have both a physical card and a virtual card …”).
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anderson et al (U. S. Patent Application Publication No. 20230004951 A1), herein referred to as Anderson, in view of Matthews et al (U. S. Patent Application Publication No. 20230087384 A1), herein referred to as Matthews, and in further view of Zakaras et al (U. S. Patent Application Publication No. 20170154328 A1), herein referred to as Zakaras.
As per claim 21, Anderson and Matthews disclose all the limitations of claim 1. Anderson and Matthews do not specifically disclose, however, Zakaras discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 1, wherein at least one of a passcode, biometric data is received from the mobile device to authenticate the requestor (para 17, “A financial institution application running on a user device may require a user to enter one or more credentials before requesting information from a backend system … credentials may include user authentication credentials, which may be a user authentication input … a password entry, PIN, gesture, which may include a motion, tap, rotation, button press, a signature entry, symbol, and/or biometric data (fingerprint, facial recognition, and the like) …”; para 18, “A financial institution application running on a user device may require a user to enter one or more credentials before requesting information from a backend system … credentials may include user authentication credentials, which may be a user authentication input, such as for example, a password entry, PIN, gesture, which may include a motion, tap, rotation, button press, a signature entry, symbol, and/or biometric data (fingerprint, facial recognition, and the like) …”; FIG. 1, item 160; para 65, “User authentication system 160 may utilize software including user authentication input recognition algorithms, which may include a pattern matching algorithm that will compare the card user performed user authentication input, which may be a gesture or voiceprint, to the prerecording of the predetermined user authentication input which may be saved on EMV™ chip 122, backend 318 system, and/or user authentication system 160. Microcontroller 224 may perform voice recognition to determine if EMVTM chip 212 and/or a dynamic transaction card 200's magnetic stripe should be activated to activate the dynamic transaction card for usage …”).
Zakaras discloses a dynamic transaction card protected by gesture and voice recognition. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include a dynamic transaction card protected by gesture and voice recognition, as in Zakaras; and to include virtual card generation and provisioning for bulk requests, as in Matthews, to improve and/or enhance the technology for providing a buy now pay later product to a credit account holder, as in Anderson, because it would amount to combining elements that in the combination would perform the same function as they functioned separately. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have been motivated to combine the references to provide a dynamic transaction card including components, such as sensors that may be used to activate the dynamic transaction card by authenticating the card user as authorized to use the card through user authentication input recognition, which may be a gesture, voice recognition, and/or biometric data (fingerprints, facial recognition, and the like), and thus being a more secure authentication of the user.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Liu et al (U. S. Patent Application Publication No. 20160275485 A1) – Device, System, And Method For Creating Virtual Credit Card
Liu discloses a device, system and method for creating virtual credit. The method includes acquiring user real-name information from a user interface by a terminal device, wherein an electronic exchange account associating with the acquired user real-name information is not saved in a first server; sending the user real-name information to a second server; detecting if a credit card account associating with the user real-name information is saved in the second server, and creating a virtual credit card account if the credit card account is saved in the second server; and storing the virtual credit card associated with the virtual credit card account in the data storage of the first server.
Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN CHISM whose telephone number is (571) 272-5915. The examiner can normally be reached during 9:00 AM – 3:00 PM Monday – Thursday, 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, Ryan D. Donlon can be reached (571) 270-3602. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/STEVEN R CHISM/Examiner, Art Unit 3692
/DAVID P SHARVIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3692