06Notice 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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1, 4, 7, 10, 13, 16, 17 and 19 are amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments regarding the 101 rejection of the claims have been considered but are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the claims recite features that cannot be performed by a human such as retrieval of metadata and completing the transaction using a digital wallet. A standard wallet balancing transaction performed by a human would not involve the specific metadata retrieval and analysis processes presented. The claims also enhance the technical field of digital wallet management.
The specific metadata comprises spending criteria and end/renewal data information. This information does not require the use of a computer to obtain and could be obtained by a human consulting their own records/agreements pertaining to their payment instruments. Completing a transaction using a digital wallet is merely adding the words apply it since completing transactions have been performed before the invention of conventional computers.
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.
Claim(s) 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s):
An electronic device comprising:
at least one output device, including a display;
a communication system;
a memory having stored thereon a digital wallet module presenting a suggested payment source to complete a financial transaction, from among a plurality of payment sources within a digital wallet, in part to minimize or eliminate incurring a periodic account fee of the suggested payment source; and
at least one processor communicatively coupled to the display, the communication system, and the memory, the at least one processor executing program code of the digital wallet module which enables the electronic device to:
identify an intended spend amount for a financial transaction to be paid for via use of one of the plurality of payment sources within the digital wallet, the plurality of payment sources comprising at least a first payment source that has a periodic account fee that is automatically applied at an end/renewal date of a tracked period, based on a total spend amount using the first payment source during the tracked period not reaching a minimum spending criteria;
retrieve, from electronic records, payment source metadata of the plurality of payment sources, the payment source metadata comprising at least the minimum spending criteria and the end/renewal date for each of the at least one first payment source;
in part based on the intended spend amount and the payment source metadata, determine a preferred payment source from among the plurality of payment sources to suggest for use in completing the financial transaction, while maximizing a collective financial benefit of selectively utilizing the plurality of payment sources within the digital wallet to complete financial transactions up to and following the end/renewal date;
present, on an output device, an indication to utilize the first payment source in response to determining that reducing a balance remaining to meet the minimum spending criteria is a best option to maximize the collective financial benefit; and
completing the financial transaction using the indicated first payment source from within the digital wallet.
The underlined limitations represent certain methods of organizing human activity, managing personal behavior because the claims recite methods and systems for economically using payment sources to avoid or reduce fees. The concept is similar to that of Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Bank (USA), 792 F.3d 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1636 (Fed. Cir. 2015). The patentee in this case claimed methods comprising storing user-selected pre-set limits on spending in a database, and when one of the limits is reached, communicating a notification to the user via a device. 792 F.3d. at 1367, 115 USPQ2d at 1639-40. The Federal Circuit determined that the claims were directed to the abstract idea of "tracking financial transactions to determine whether they exceed a pre-set spending limit (i.e., budgeting)", which "is not meaningfully different from the ideas found to be abstract in other cases before the Supreme Court and our court involving methods of organizing human activity." 792 F.3d. at 1367-68, 115 USPQ2d at 1640 (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(C).
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claimed method. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the claims comprise only the abstract idea and the words “apply it”, or the like. Claims 10 and 19 are similarly rejected.
The dependent claims merely narrow the abstract idea and as a whole and in combination the claims merely comprise the abstract idea and the words “apply it”, or the like.
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 WILLIAM E RANKINS whose telephone number is (571)270-3465. The examiner can normally be reached on 9-530 M-F.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Bennett Sigmond can be reached on 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 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/WILLIAM E RANKINS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3694
Prosecution Insights