DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
2. Applicant filed the amendment on 08/19/2025. Claims 1-11 and 13-14 are pending. Claims 1-11 and 13-14 are amended. Claims 1-11 and 13-14 are rejected. After careful consideration of applicant arguments, the examiner finds them to be not persuasive.
Rejection under 35 USC § 101
3. Applicant is of the opinion that amendments to claims 1 and 13 overcome rejection under 101.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Amendments to claims 1, 11, and 13 raise issues that the claims recite an abstract idea, therefore, the rejections are maintained.
Rejection under 35 USC § 112
4. Applicant is of the opinion that amendment to claim 14 overcomes rejection under 112(b) “Unclear scope”.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Amendment to claim 14 did not address to the issue, therefore, the rejection is sustained.
Rejection under 35 USC § 102
5. The rejections under 35 USC § 102 are withdrawn due to amendments.
Rejection under 35 USC § 103
6. Applicant argues that prior art reference Chan et al. does not teach or suggest the amended claims.
Applicant arguments are no longer applicable because they are moot in light of the new ground of rejection.
Claim Interpretation
Optional Language
7. Optional limitations are generally not given patentable weight. See MPEP 2103(I)(C) (“Language that suggests or makes a feature or step optional but does not require that feature or step does not limit the scope of a claim under the broadest reasonable claim interpretation.”).
Claim 1 recites “checking whether the pairing device identified in the pairing request… and whether the location associated with the pairing device …”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC §101
8. 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.
9. Claims 1-11 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
10. In the instant case, claims 1, 11, and 13 are directed to a “method, communicating object, and non-transitory computer-readable information medium for contactless communication between a communicating object and a communication device”.
11. Claim 1 recites “accessing resource in a particular location”. Specifically, claim 1 recites “determining an item of information in relation to a use context … and a location associated with … associated the said area; receiving … a pairing request … associated with said area, wherein the pairing request identifies …; checking whether … identified in the pairing request corresponds … associated with the area and whether the location associated with … associated with the area corresponds to the location … in the area; and based on a result of the checking, pairing … identified by the received pairing request … being associated with the identified …”. Subject matter grouped under “Certain methods of organizing human activity” (e.g., commercial or legal interactions) and an abstract idea in prong one of step 2A (MPEP 2106.04(a)).
12. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because, when analyzed under prong two of step 2A (MPEP 2106.04 II), the additional elements of claim 1 such as “a communicating object”, “a communication device”, and “a pairing device” represent the use of a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and/or does no more than generally link the abstract idea to a particular field of use. And, with respect to “receiving by the communicating object a pairing request from the pairing device associated with said area, wherein the pairing request identifies a pairing device” is simply transmitting data, “[use] of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) (e.g., a fundamental economic practice or mathematical equation) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more, (MPEP 2106.05(f)(2)).
13. When analyzed under step 2B (MPEP 2106.04 II), 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 describe the concept of accessing resource in a particular location using computer technology (e.g., the processor). Therefore, the use of these additional elements does no more than employ a computer as a tool to automate and/or implement the abstract idea, which cannot provide significantly more than the abstract idea itself (MPEP 2106.05(I)(A)(f) & (h)).
14. Hence, claim 1 is not patent eligible.
15. Claims 11 and 13 also recite “accessing resource in a particular location”. Subject matter grouped under “Certain methods of organizing human activity” (e.g., commercial or legal interactions) and an abstract idea in prong one of step 2A (MPEP 2106.04(a)).
16. As in the case of claim 1, the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because when analyzed under prong two of step 2A (MPEP 2106.04 II), the additional elements of claims 11 and 13 such as “a communicating object”, “a communication device”, “at least one processor”, “at least one non-transitory computer readable medium”, “a pairing device”, and “a non-transitory computer-readable information medium” represent the use of a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and/or does no more than generally link the abstract idea to a particular field of use. With respect to “receiving a pairing request from the pairing device associated with said area, wherein the pairing request identifies a pairing device” is simply transmitting data, “[use] of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) (e.g., a fundamental economic practice or mathematical equation) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more, (MPEP 2106.05(f)(2)).
17. When analyzed under step 2B (MPEP 2106.04 II), the claims do 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 describe the concept of accessing resource in a particular location using computer technology (e.g., the processor). Therefore, the use of these additional elements does no more than employ a computer as a tool to automate and/or implement the abstract idea, which cannot provide significantly more than the abstract idea itself (MPEP 2106.05(I)(A)(f) & (h)).
18. Hence, claims 11 and 13 are not patent eligible.
19. Dependent claim 2 further describes the abstract idea of accessing resource in a particular location, as recites “comprising activation of the reception of the pairing request by: comparing information, including said item of information in relation to the use context … and data in relation to said location associated with … with second reference information that represents a pairing situation … as being valid, and at an end of said comparison, establishing that there is a match between the first information and the second information”. The additional elements such as “the communicating object” and “said pairing device” represent the use of a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and do no more than generally link the abstract idea to a particular field of use. And, therefore, do not improve the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field.
Dependent claim 3 further describes the abstract idea of accessing resource in a particular location, as recites “comprising activation of the reception of the pairing request by: combining said item of information in relation to the use context … and data in relation to said location associated with … obtaining a score representative of a result of the combination, comparing the obtained score with a threshold, and depending on the result of the comparison, activating the reception of the pairing request”. The additional elements such as “the communicating object” and “said pairing device” represent the use of a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and do no more than generally link the abstract idea to a particular field of use. And, therefore, do not improve the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field.
Dependent claim 4 further describes the abstract idea of accessing resource in a particular location, as recites “wherein the item of information in relation to the use context … is representative of an environment in which … is located or contains at least one operating datum in relation …”. The additional element such as “the communicating object” represents the use of a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and do no more than generally link the abstract idea to a particular field of use. And, therefore, do not improve the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field.
Dependent claim 5 further describes the abstract idea of accessing resource in a particular location, as recites “comprising receiving the item of use context information in a message received … associated said area … located in said environment, said item of information indicating a location close …”. The additional elements such as “the communicating object”, “the pairing device”, “a message-transmitting device” represent the use of a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and do no more than generally link the abstract idea to a particular field of use. And, therefore, do not improve the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field.
Dependent claim 6 further describes the abstract idea of accessing resource in a particular location, as recites “wherein the item of use context information representative of an environment in which … is located comprises a geolocation datum in relation … with respect … associated with said area”. The additional elements such as “the communicating object” and “the pairing device” represent the use of a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and do no more than generally link the abstract idea to a particular field of use. And, therefore, do not improve the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field.
Dependent claim 7 further describes the abstract idea of accessing resource in a particular location, as recites “wherein the item of use context information representative of an environment in which … is located contains a datum coming from …”. The additional elements such as “the communicating object” and “at least one sensor belonging to the communicating object” represent the use of a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and do no more than generally link the abstract idea to a particular field of use. And, therefore, do not improve the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field.
Dependent claim 8 further describes the abstract idea of accessing resource in a particular location, as recites “wherein the item of information in relation to the use context … contains at least one operating datum in relation … and wherein the at least one operating datum in relation … is a current operating parameter recorded … or an element of a history of the communications or transactions carried out…”. The additional element such as “the communicating object” represents the use of a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and do no more than generally link the abstract idea to a particular field of use. And, therefore, do not improve the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field.
Dependent claim 9 further describes the abstract idea of accessing resource in a particular location, as recites “wherein the location associated with …is determined …”. The additional elements such as “the identified pairing device” and “a memory of the communicating object” represent the use of a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and do no more than generally link the abstract idea to a particular field of use. And, therefore, do not improve the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field.
Dependent claim 10 further describes the abstract idea of accessing resource in a particular location, as recites “wherein the location associated with …is determined from a content of a message received… located in an environment …”. The additional elements such as “said pairing device”, “a message-transmitting device”, and “the communicating object” represent the use of a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and do no more than generally link the abstract idea to a particular field of use. And, therefore, do not improve the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field.
Dependent claim 14 further describes the abstract idea of accessing resource in a particular location. The additional elements such as “the communicating object” and “the communication device” represent the use of a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and do no more than generally link the abstract idea to a particular field of use. And, therefore, do not improve the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field.
Conclusion
20. The claims as a whole do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. This is because the claims do not effect an improvement to another technology or technical field; the claims do not amount to an improvement to the functioning of a computer system itself; and the claims do not move beyond a general link of the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment.
21. Accordingly, there are no meaningful limitations in the claims that transform the judicial exception into a patent eligible application such that the claims amount to significantly more than the judicial exception itself.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
22. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
23. Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Unclear scope
24. “An essential purpose of patent examination is to fashion claims that are precise, clear, correct, and unambiguous. Only in this way can uncertainties of claim scope be removed, as much as possible, during the administrative process.” Zletz, 893 F.2d at 322, 13 USPQ2d at 1322. “For example, if the language of a claim, given its broadest reasonable interpretation, is such that a person of ordinary skill in the relevant art would read it with more than one reasonable interpretation, then a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph is appropriate.” MPEP 2173.02 I.
25. Claim 14 comprises the “communicating object as claimed in claim 11” and the “communication device”. However, claim 11, from which claim 14 depends, is directed to the “communicating object”, only. Therefore, it is not clear whether the “contactless communication system” is comprised within the “communicating object” or the “contactless communicating system” comprises the “communicating object”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
26. 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.
27. 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.
28. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
29. Claim 1-2, 4-11, and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US20190220850A1 to Crowe et al. in view of US20170032337A1 to Berger.
30. As per claims 1, 11, and 13:
Crowe et al. discloses the following limitations:
A method for contactless communication between a communicating object (Fig.1, item 116) and a communication device (Fig.1, item 102a) in order to implement a transaction, wherein the method is implemented by the communicating object, which is located in an area in which said transaction is implemented, and comprises autonomous execution of the following (Fig.1, items 102a, 106, 112, 116; [0014] “FIG. 1 illustrates an exemplary system 100 in which one or more aspects of the present disclosure may be implemented…”, [0016] “In general herein, each of the multiple merchants 102 a-d offers products (e.g., goods, services, etc.) for sale to consumers, including to the consumer 114, etc. The merchants 102 a-d may offer goods for sale through physical locations or through virtual locations, etc. … the consumer 114, for example, is permitted to browse the virtual locations and, when appropriate, select one or more products for purchase…”, [0018] “… The consumer 114 is also associated with a communication device 116. The communication device 116 includes a wallet application 118, which is an electronic wallet (also referred to as a virtual wallet or digital wallet) …”)
determining an item of information in relation to a use context of the communicating object and a location associated with a pairing device associated with said area (Fig.1, 102a, 116, 118, 120; [0019] “…the system 100 includes a wallet platform 120 (e.g., a digital acceptance network (switch), etc.). The wallet platform 120 is associated with the wallet application 118 at the consumer's communication device 116, and is configured to perform as a “backend” for the wallet application 118 to facilitate operations described herein…”, fig.2, items 200, 210; [0021] “…The computing device 200 may include, for example, one or more servers, workstations, personal computers, laptops, tablets, smartphones, etc. In addition, the computing device 200 may include a single computing device, or it may include multiple computing devices located in close proximity or distributed over a geographic region… the merchant 102 a-d, the acquirer 104, the PSP 106, the payment network 108, and the issuer 110 may each include, or be implemented in, a computing device consistent with computing device 200, coupled to (and in communication with) the network 112…”, [0026] “…The network interface 210 may include, without limitation, a wired network adapter, a wireless network adapter (e.g., a near field communication (NFC™) adapter, a Bluetooth™ adapter, etc.), a mobile network adapter, or other device capable of communicating to one or more different networks, including the network 112…”, [0028] “…When each selection is provided (potentially along with other information (e.g., payment account credentials for the consumer's payment account (e.g., a primary account number (PAN), etc.), a shipping address, loyalty account information, etc.), the wallet platform 120 is configured to receive a request from the consumer 114, via the website, to pair the wallet application 118 with the PSP 106.”)
receiving by the communicating object a pairing request from the pairing device associated with said area, wherein the pairing request identifies a pairing device (Fig.1, items 102a, 106, 114, 116, 118; [0017] “…The PSP 106 may be incorporated and/or integrated, for example, with the virtual locations of the merchants 102 a-d so that the PSP 106 is invoked (e.g., via an application programming interface (API), etc.) upon the consumer's request to checkout at the respective one of the multiple merchants 102 a-d (e.g., when the consumer 114 selects a checkout icon at a website associated with one of the merchants 102 a-d, etc.)…”, [0037] “… the request is submitted by the merchant 102 a, at 302, to the PSP 106 in connection with the transaction, or as a specific paring operation/request through the merchant 102 a. Or, the pairing request may be submitted in response to any other interaction with the merchant 102 a (i.e., those omitting a particular transaction)…”, [0030] “… The selected or default merchant(s) and PSP(s) are then identified in the request, along with the consumer's wallet application 118 to be paired…”)
Crowe et al. does not disclose, however, Berger, as shown, teaches the following limitations:
checking whether the pairing device identified in the pairing request corresponds to the pairing device associated with the area and whether the location associated with the pairing device associated with the area corresponds to the location of the communicating object in the area (Fig.1, items 102, 110, 114, fig. 2, items 110a, 150a, 1002, [0029] “…Other applications 114 may also include other location detection applications, which may be used to determine a location for user 102 …”, [0056] “…user 102 a is shown in a merchant location A 1002 where user 102 a may wish to purchase an item 1100 that user 102 a has selected at merchant location A 1002. In this regard, a merchant 202 a may utilize merchant device 150 a to enter information (which does not include an identifier for user 102 a) for item 1100 to a transaction and cause merchant device 150 a to generate a digital invoice for the transaction. User 102 a may then be matched to the digital invoice based on user 102 a's location at merchant location A 1002 matching the location for merchant 202 a and merchant device 150 a. The location for user 102 a may be determined using communication device 110 a, such as through a GPS device of communication device 110 a.”
based on a result of the checking, pairing with the communication device via the pairing device identified by the received pairing request, said communication device being associated with the identified pairing device (Fig.3, items 110, 140, 150, 2106, 2110, 2112; [0060] “FIG. 3 is an exemplary interaction between a communication device, a payment provider server, and a merchant device for pairing of transactions based on associated data between a user and a merchant…”, [0062] “…Transaction pairing application 140 may access merchant A parameters, which may include current merchant parameters 2004. Additionally, transaction pairing application 140 may further access user information 2108 for a plurality of users, which may include user parameters 2110. By correlating merchant A parameters 2106 with user parameters 2110, a matching user 2112 may be determined. Once matched, transaction pairing application 140 provide matched user 2006 to merchant device 150.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a method for pairing of transaction partners using associated data and identifiers wherein a user may engage in a transaction with a merchant of Berger (‘337, abstract) with teaching of Crowe et al. for pairing an electronic wallet for a consumer with a service provider by requesting to pair the electronic wallet with the service provider where the electronic wallet is associated with an account and where the account is associated with a user (‘850, abstract) for including location detection applications, which may be used to determine a location for user, that allows to determine location of the merchant matching to user’s location, and pairing the communication device with the merchant device through the payment provider server (‘337, [0029], [0056], [0062]).
As per claim 11, Crowe et al. additionally discloses the following limitations:
at least one processor (Fig.2, item 202)
at least one non-transitory computer readable medium (Fig.2, item 204)
As per claim 13, Crowe et al. additionally discloses the following limitations:
A non-transitory computer-readable information medium (Fig.2, item 204)
at least one processor (Fig.2, item 202)
31. As per claim 2:
Crowe et al. discloses the following limitations:
comparing information, including said at least one item of information in relation to the use context of the communicating object and data in relation to said location associated with said pairing device, with second reference information that represents a pairing situation of the communicating object as being valid ([0033] “…After validating the pairing token, the wallet platform 120 is configured to pass profile data related to the consumer 114, shipping information, loyalty information, payment information, transaction information for the instant transaction, etc. (e.g., as requested, obtained, etc. from the consumer 114 during the consumer's initial pairing request; as requested, obtained, etc. from the wallet application 118; etc.) to the PSP 106, through the separate user interface (e.g., the Masterpass™ web user interface, etc.) displayed to the consumer 114, at the communication device 116 (e.g., via the API, etc. in this example)…”)
at an end of said comparison, establishing that there is a match between the first information and the second information ([0033] “…The user interface, for example, provides transaction details to the consumer 114 for the given transaction at the merchant 102 a (e.g., an item name, item image, price of the item, shipping details, tax, fees, merchant name, merchant URL, etc.) and allows the consumer 114 to confirm payment information (e.g., an account number, etc.). Such transaction details may be provided by the PSP 106 (as part of the information provided to the PSP 106 by the wallet platform 120 and/or the wallet application 118). In addition, within the separate user interface, the consumer 114 may be provided the option to select the payment account (or multiple payment accounts) included in the wallet application 118 for use in the transaction, shipping options (e.g., different shipping addresses, etc.), different loyalty accounts, etc., as passed from the wallet platform 120 to the consumer 114 as the profile data…”)
32. As per claim 4:
Crowe et al. discloses the following limitations:
wherein the item of information in relation to the use context of the communicating object is representative of an environment in which the communicating object is located or contains at least one operating datum in relation to the communicating object ([0028] “…The wallet platform 120 is configured to then solicit, via the website, a selection of the PSP 106 (either by directly selecting the PSP 106 or by selection of one or more merchants (e.g., one or more of the merchants 102 a-d, etc.) associated with the PSP 106). When each selection is provided (potentially along with other information (e.g., payment account credentials for the consumer's payment account (e.g., a primary account number (PAN), etc.), a shipping address, loyalty account information, etc.), the wallet platform 120 is configured to receive a request from the consumer 114…”, [0030] “… when performing a payment account transaction with the merchant 102 a (through a virtual location associated with the merchant 102 a), the consumer 114 may submit a request to pair the wallet application 118 with the PSP 106, via the virtual location associated with the merchant 102 a, where the request is then passed to the PSP 106 by the merchant 102 a…”)
33. As per claim 5:
Crowe et al. discloses the following limitations:
receiving the item of use context information in a message received by the communicating object from the pairing device associated with said area or from a message-transmitting device located in said environment, said item of information indicating a location close to the communicating object ([0030] “…when performing a payment account transaction with the merchant 102 a (through a virtual location associated with the merchant 102 a), the consumer 114 may submit a request to pair the wallet application 118 with the PSP 106, via the virtual location associated with the merchant 102 a, where the request is then passed to the PSP 106 by the merchant 102 a, or directly transmitted to the PSP 106 through an API called by the merchant's virtual location. In either case, the request may default to the specific merchant 102 a and PSP 106 (as generally associated with the merchant 102 a and the merchant's virtual location), or permit the consumer 114 to select additional merchants and/or PSPs. The selected or default merchant(s) and PSP(s) are then identified in the request, along with the consumer's wallet application 118 to be paired. The PSP 106, in turn, is configured to submit the request for the pairing to the wallet platform 120 through a pairing API exposed by the wallet platform 120.”)
34. As per claim 6:
Crowe et al. does not disclose, however, Berger, as shown, teaches the following limitations:
wherein the item of use context information representative of an environment in which the communicating object is located comprises a geolocation datum in relation to the communicating object with respect to the pairing device associated with said area ([0022] “…communication device 110 may include GPS systems, modules, components, or other features used to determine a location of user 102…”, [0026] “…The user parameters may correspond to information about user 102, including a location of user 102, personal information for user 102 (e.g., name, address, social security number, etc.), identifiers for one or more accounts of user 102 (e.g., an email, messaging name, social networking contact, phone number, or other identification), other identifiers for objects associated with user 102…”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a method for pairing of transaction partners using associated data and identifiers wherein a user may engage in a transaction with a merchant of Berger (‘337, abstract) with teaching of Crowe et al. for pairing an electronic wallet for a consumer with a service provider by requesting to pair the electronic wallet with the service provider where the electronic wallet is associated with an account and where the account is associated with a user (‘850, abstract) for providing information about user, including a location of user, personal information for user (e.g., name, address, social security number, etc.), identifiers for one or more accounts of user (e.g., an email, messaging name, social networking contact, phone number, or other identification) (‘337, [0026]).
35. As per claim 7:
Crowe et al. does not disclose, however, Berger, as shown, teaches the following limitations:
wherein the item of use context information representative of an environment in which the communicating object is located contains a datum coming from at least one sensor belonging to the communicating object (Fig.1, items 110, 114; [0026] “… The user parameters may be entered by user 102 to communication device 110 or may be captured using one or more devices or associated hardware of communication device 110 (e.g., a camera, sensor, GPS device, connected biometric device, etc.).”, [0029] “…Other applications 114 may also include other location detection applications, which may be used to determine a location for user 102, such as a mapping, compass, and/or GPS application, which can include a specialized GPS receiver that obtains location information for communication device 110 and processes the location information to determine a location of the device…)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a method for pairing of transaction partners using associated data and identifiers wherein a user may engage in a transaction with a merchant of Berger (‘337, abstract) with teaching of Crowe et al. for pairing an electronic wallet for a consumer with a service provider by requesting to pair the electronic wallet with the service provider where the electronic wallet is associated with an account and where the account is associated with a user (‘850, abstract) for including location detection applications, which may be used to determine a location for user, such as a mapping, compass, and/or GPS application, which can include a specialized GPS receiver that obtains location information for communication device and processes the location information to determine a location of the device (‘337, [0029]).
36. As per claim 8:
Crowe et al. does not disclose, however, Berger, as shown, teaches the following limitations:
wherein the item of information in relation to the use context of the communicating object contains at least one operating datum in relation to the communicating object, and wherein the at least one operating datum in relation to the communicating object is a current operating parameter recorded by the communicating object or an element of a history of the communications or transactions carried out by the communicating object ([0027] “…past locations for user 102 and/or past transactions conducted by user 102 with one or more merchants (including transaction information, such as items, purchase amount, time, location, merchant, etc.). The past transactional information for user 102 may be associated with user interactions for user 102, which may further include search histories, merchant requests/orders, messages, phone calls, and other interactions with users and/or merchants…”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a method for pairing of transaction partners using associated data and identifiers wherein a user may engage in a transaction with a merchant of Berger (‘337, abstract) with teaching of Crowe et al. for pairing an electronic wallet for a consumer with a service provider by requesting to pair the electronic wallet with the service provider where the electronic wallet is associated with an account and where the account is associated with a user (‘850, abstract) for including past information for user may be stored and used as the user parameters, including past locations for user and/or past transactions conducted by user with one or more merchants (including transaction information, such as items, purchase amount, time, location, merchant, etc.) (‘337, [0027]).
37. As per claim 9:
Crowe et al. does not disclose, however, Berger, as shown, teaches the following limitations:
wherein the location associated with the identified pairing device is determined from a memory of the communicating object ([0027] “… Additionally, past information for user 102 may be stored and used as the user parameters, including past locations for user 102 and/or past transactions conducted by user 102 with one or more merchants (including transaction information, such as items, purchase amount, time, location, merchant, etc.) …”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a method for pairing of transaction partners using associated data and identifiers wherein a user may engage in a transaction with a merchant of Berger (‘337, abstract) with teaching of Crowe et al. for pairing an electronic wallet for a consumer with a service provider by requesting to pair the electronic wallet with the service provider where the electronic wallet is associated with an account and where the account is associated with a user (‘850, abstract) for including past information for user stored and used as the user parameters, including past locations for user and/or past transactions conducted by user with one or more merchants (‘337, [0027]).
38. As per claim 10:
Crowe et al. discloses the following limitations:
wherein the location associated with said pairing device is determined from a content of a message received from said pairing device or from a message-transmitting device located in an environment of the communicating object ([0030] “…when performing a payment account transaction with the merchant 102 a (through a virtual location associated with the merchant 102 a), the consumer 114 may submit a request to pair the wallet application 118 with the PSP 106, via the virtual location associated with the merchant 102 a, where the request is then passed to the PSP 106 by the merchant 102 a, or directly transmitted to the PSP 106 through an API called by the merchant's virtual location…”)
39. As per claim 14:
Crowe et al. discloses the following limitations:
the communicating object (Fig.1, item 116)
the communication device (Fig.1, item 102a)
40. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US20190220850A1 to Crowe et al. in view of US20170032337A1 to Berger and US20170046706A1 to Agarwal.
41. As per claim 3:
Crowe et al. discloses the following limitations:
depending on the result of the comparison, activating the reception of the pairing request ([0033] “When the pairing token for the consumer 114 (as previously generated by the wallet platform 120) is stored at the PSP 106 (e.g., when the wallet platform 120 is generally integrated with the PSP 106 and/or has previously transmitted the pairing token to the PSP 106, etc.), the PSP 106 is configured to call the wallet platform 120 (and, for example, as described more below, pass the pairing token for the consumer 114 to the wallet platform 120). In response, the wallet platform 120 is configured to receive the pairing token associated with the wallet application 118 from the PSP 106, and validate the token (e.g., compare the received pairing token to the pairing token stored at the wallet platform 120, of via other conventional operations, etc.). After validating the pairing token, the wallet platform 120 is configured to pass profile data related to the consumer 114, shipping information, loyalty information, payment information, transaction information for the instant transaction…”)
Neither Crowe et al., no Berger disclose, however, Agarwal, as shown, teaches the following limitations:
combining said item of information in relation to the use context of the communicating object and data in relation to said location associated with said pairing device (Fig.1, items 110, 120; [0018] “During a mobile payment transaction between a mobile terminal 110 and the POS terminal 120 operated by the merchant, the mobile terminal 110 reports its geographic location to the POS terminal 120…”, [0019] “…the user terminal 110 may communicate to the POS terminal 120 a transaction token that is a proxy for the credit card number and is generated to be unique to the particular POS terminal 120. The transaction token may include a Device Account Number (DAN) which identifies the mobile terminal 110 and a device specific dynamic security code which is generated by an application executed by the mobile terminal 110…”)
obtaining a score representative of a result of the combination (Fig.2, items 200, 202; [0022] “Referring to FIGS. 1 and 2, over time the computer node receives (block 200) mobile payment messages from the POS terminal 120 arising from a series of mobile payment transactions with mobile terminals 110 operated by purchasers (e.g., a line of purchasers sequentially processed at a check-out counter). Each of the mobile payment messages contains transaction information, a network address for the POS terminal 120, and a geographic location provided by the mobile terminal. The computer node generates (block 202) a risk score of the POS terminal 120, referred to as a POS terminal risk shore, based on similarity between the geographic locations provided by mobile terminals contained in the mobile payment messages which also contain the network address for the POS terminal…”)
comparing the obtained score with a threshold (Fig.5, item 500; [0032] “Referring to FIG. 5, the authorization control node 150 can generate (block 500) the POS terminal risk score based on a number of the mobile payment messages that contain the network address for the POS terminal and further contain geographic locations provided by the mobile terminals 110 that are within a threshold geographic proximity of each other…”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a method for pairing of transaction partners using associated data and identifiers wherein a user may engage in a transaction with a merchant of Berger (‘337, abstract) and a method for performing mobile payment transaction with another mobile terminal subsequent to the generating of the POS terminal risk score, that controlled based on the POS terminal risk score and transaction information contained in the another mobile payment message of Agarwal (‘706, [0005]) with teaching of Crowe et al. for pairing an electronic wallet for a consumer with a service provider by requesting to pair the electronic wallet with the service provider where the electronic wallet is associated with an account and where the account is associated with a user (‘850, abstract) for creating reports of the mobile terminal’s geographic location related to the POS terminal, generating messages that contains transaction information and generating the POS terminal risk score based on a number of messages that contain the network address for the POS terminal and further contain geographic locations provided by the mobile terminals (‘706, [0018], [0032]).
Conclusion
42. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US20140180777A1 – Moshrefi et al. – Discloses a method and apparatus for improved approaches for pairing of a POS system and mobile device, wherein determining, by a POS system, a proximity of a physical location of a mobile device to an access point associated with the POS system, wherein the mobile device is configured to connect to the access point and to initiate establishment of a communication session over a service provider network.
US20150249913A1 – Hua et al. – Discloses methods and systems for pairing communication instruments wherein to initiate pairing, at least one user waves a device at a location and based on the location, a service provider determines and provides the user who waved the device a list of other communication instruments in the area that the user may want to be paired with.
US11871237B1 – Han et al. – Discloses system and method for pairing a payment object reader with a point-of-sale (POS) terminal, wherein determining, by a wireless transceiver, a first value of signal strength corresponding to a current position of the payment object reader and a second value of signal strength corresponding to a new position of the payment object reader.
US20200320504A1 – Chatterton – Discloses systems and methods for a dongle device for automatic pairing of payment terminal to mobile computing device, wherein a merchant location may include one or more merchant devices used to provide sales to between the merchant and customers through generating transactions and processing payments.
US20150126109A1 – Keshavdas et al. – Discloses a mobile device for performing wireless communication, a microprocessor for operating said mobile device, a near field communications (NFC) system, wherein NFC system for receiving or transmitting signals with an NFC capable device, and a pairing system implemented in the microprocessor for pairing one NFC capable device with another NFC capable device.
43. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. 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 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.
44. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMANULLA ABDULLAEV whose telephone number is (571)272-4367. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30AM -4:30PM ET.
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 at 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 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.
/AMANULLA ABDULLAEV/ Examiner, Art Unit 3692 /DAVID P SHARVIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3692
Prosecution Insights