DETAILED ACTION
Acknowledgements
This action is an amended response to Applicant’s filing on Aug. 4, 2025, and is made Final.
The prior Notice of Allowance mailed Sept. 9, 2025, was withdrawn by the Director, Patent Technology Center 3600, to reopen prosecution with direction to reject the claims under 35 U.S.C. § 101 based on post-allowance agency review.
This action is being examined by James H. Miller, who is in the eastern time zone (EST), and who can be reached by email at James.Miller1@uspto.gov or by telephone at (469) 295-9082.
Interviews
Examiner interviews are available by telephone or, preferably, by video conferencing using the USPTO’s web-based collaboration platform. Applicants are strongly encouraged to schedule via the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) portal at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. Interviews conducted solely for the purpose of “sounding out” the examiner, including by local counsel acting only as a conduit for another practitioner, are not permitted under MPEP § 713.03. The Office is strictly enforcing established interview practice, and applicants should ensure that every interview request is directed toward advancing prosecution on the merits in compliance with MPEP §§ 713 and 713.03.
For after-final Interview requests, supervisory approval is required before an interview may be granted. Each AIR should specifically explain how the After-Final Interview request will advance prosecution—for example, by identifying targeted arguments responsive to the rejection of record, alleged defects in the examiner’s analysis, proposed claim amendments, or another concrete basis for discussion. See MPEP § 713. If the AIR form’s character limits prevent inclusion of all pertinent details, Applicants may send a contemporaneous email to the examiner at James.Miller1@uspto.gov.
The examiner is generally available Monday through Friday, 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. EST.
For any GRANTED Interview Request, Applicant can expect an email within 24 hours confirming an interview slot from the dates/times proposed and providing collaboration tool access instructions. For any DENIED Interview Request, the record will include a communication explaining the reason for the denial.
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 Status
The status of claims is as follows:
Claims 1–20 remain pending and examined with Claims 1, 8, and 15 in independent form.
No Claims are presently amended, cancelled, or added.
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on Jul. 28, 2025, disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of U.S. Pat. No. 11,887,127 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded. The double patenting rejection of Claims 1, 8, and 15 set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed May 20, 2025, [“Non-Final Office Action”] is withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1–20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Under Step 1, Rep. Claim 1 is directed to a system comprising one or more processors configured to execute instructions to perform operations. Therefore, on its face, claim 1 is directed to a statutory category of invention.
Under step 2A, prong 1, Rep. Claim 1 recites:
… facilitating activation of foreign transaction services via a terminal-purchase-triggered alert, the system comprising:
[…] operations comprising:
based on the transaction information, determining that the purchase transaction indicates a purchase of a travel-related product;
in response to determining that the purchase transaction indicates the purchase of the travel-related product, extracting a plurality of time periods and one or more geographic areas corresponding to the plurality of time periods;
generating, based on the plurality of time periods and the one or more geographic areas, a purchase-transaction-triggered alert […] to enable a foreign transaction service for the plurality of time periods associated with a payment account of a user, wherein […] comprises a plurality of indications for the plurality of time periods and the one or more geographic areas, and the […] initialization of the foreign transaction service during the plurality of time periods for each corresponding geographic area;
in response to […] in the purchase-transaction-triggered alert, activating of the foreign transaction service during the plurality of time periods for each corresponding geographic area and configuring the payment account with a transaction rule, the transaction rule defining a condition upon which approval of a foreign transaction is permitted; and
subsequent to receiving a foreign transaction request associated with the payment account, approving the foreign transaction request according to the plurality of time periods.
The foregoing claim limitations set forth or describe a manner of approving a particular type of transaction, which is a commercial or legal interaction, which falls under certain methods of organizing human activity, and therefore recites abstract idea.
Under step 2A, prong 2, the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The following are “additional elements” of claim 1: “one or more processors configured to execute instructions to perform operations… ”, “receiving transaction information indicating occurrence of a purchase transaction”, “interactive graphical component ”, “transmitting the purchase-transaction-triggered alert to a user device”, and
“user activation of the interactive graphical.“
The one or more processors, and interactive graphical component (as well as the user activation thereof) amount to no more than an instruction to “apply it” with generic computer implementation. Additionally, the “receiving” and “transmitting” limitations amount to insignificant extra-solution activity. The combination of these additional elements is no more than merely an instruction to apply the exception using generic computer implementation. Accordingly, even in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Under step 2B, the claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above, the one or more processors and interactive graphical component amount no more than an instruction to “apply it” with generic computer implementation. For the “receiving” and “transmitting” limitations considered extra-solution activity in Step 2A, these have been re-evaluated in Step 2B and determined to be well-understood, routine, conventional activities in the field. The Symantec, TLI, and OIP Techs. court decisions (MPEP 2106.05(d)(II)) indicate that mere receipt and transmission of data over a network are well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions when claimed in a merely generic manner (as it is here). For these reasons, there is no inventive concept. Rep. Claim 1 is not patent eligible. Rep. Claim 1 is not substantially different than Independent Claims 8 and 15 and includes all the limitations of Rep. Claim 1. Independent Claims 8 and 15 contain no additional elements. Therefore, Independent Claims 8 and 15 also do not recite an inventive concept.
Dependent Claims Not Significantly More
The dependent claims have been given the full two-part analysis including analyzing the additional limitations both individually and in combination. The dependent claim(s) when analyzed both individually and in combination are also held to be patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Dependent claims are dependent on Independent Claims and include all the limitations of the Independent Claims. Therefore, all dependent claims recite the same Abstract Idea. Dependent claims do not contain additional elements that integrate the abstract idea exception into a practical application or recite an inventive concept because the additional elements: (1) are mere instructions to apply the abstract idea exception; and/or (2) further limit the abstract idea exception of the Independent Claims. The abstract idea itself cannot provide the inventive concept or practical application. MPEP §§ 2106.05(I), 2106.04(d)(III).
Examiner Statement of Prior Art—No Prior Art Rejections
Based on the prior art search results, the prior art of record fails to anticipate or render obvious the claimed subject matter of the instant application. While some individual features of Claims 1–20 may be shown in the prior art of record—no known reference, alone or in combination, would provide the invention of Claims 1–20. The prior art most closely resembling the applicant’s claimed invention are:
Sirota et al. (U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2020/0294110) is pertinent because it discloses systems and methods for gift selection and distribution using messaging applications. The gifting system recommends a plurality of gift options and permits the recipient to exchange their gift to avoid unwanted gifts. Sirota, Abstract, ¶ 55.
Boyd et al. (U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2013/0159087) is pertinent because it discloses methods and systems for using loyalty program points as form of payment. Boyd, Abstract.
Savla (U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2014/0058939) is pertinent because it discloses a system for processing payment transactions using messaging or chat applications with an integrated payment application. Savla, Abstract.
Abadi (U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2007/0208627) is pertinent because it discloses a system of facilitating group payments where the gift recipient is given several options in how they receive the gift including options of “receiving money in the form of a check, Pay Pal credit, or other form of cash.” Abadi, ¶ 38.
FOR: (Int. Pat. Pub. No. WO 2019/142050 A1) is pertinent because it discloses systems and methods for gift selection and distribution using gift applications. One or more techniques authenticate the recipient user prior to processing the gift requests initiated by the sender user. Abstract.
NPL: SMS based Pooled or Collective Monetary Fund, IPCOM000227834D, May 21, 2023 is pertinent because it discloses pooled gifts to a recipient using SMS.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES H MILLER whose telephone number is (469)295-9082. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 10- 4 PM (EST).
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Bennett M Sigmond can be reached at (303) 297-4411. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JAMES H MILLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3694