DETAILED ACTION
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 claims filed 1/15/2026 are entered.
Claims 1-6 and 8-18 are pending.
Claims 1 and 10 are independent.
Claim 1 is currently amended.
Claims 2-6 and 8-9 are original.
Claims 10-18 are withdrawn.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/11/2025 was filed after the mailing date of the first Office action on the merits on 10/22/2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/15/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
35 U.S.C. 102 and 35 U.S.C. 103
Regarding the prior rejections of claims 1-9 as being anticipated or obvious over Binder (US 10,970,698 B1), Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection necessitated by the current amendment.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 8, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Champaneria (US 2015/0278803 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Champaneria discloses a computer-implemented method, comprising:
detecting, using at least one processor of an audio signal receiving device, a first device and establishing a near-field communication (NFC) exchange communication link with the first device (see para. 0047-0048, wherein “audio signal receiving device” reasonably covers a mobile device with NFC capability, since NFC operates via radio frequency; the phone is also an “audio signal receiving device” because it receives audio signals other than NFC);
receiving, using the at least one processor of the audio signal receiving device, one or more signals from the first device, each of the one or more signals being responsive to one or more transmissions generated and sent to the first device by a transceiver coil of the audio signal receiving device, the transceiver coil being coupled to the at least one processor (see para. 0047-0048);
determining, using the at least one processor of the audio signal receiving device, a signal strength of the one or more signals from the first device, and, based on the determined signal strength, determining a first position of the first device in relation to the audio signal receiving device (see para. 0049; Figs. 4-5);
generating, using the at least one processor of the audio signal receiving device, one or more prompts to reposition the first device in relation to the audio signal receiving device from the first position to one or more second positions, at least one second position in the one or more second positions corresponding to a maximum signal strength of the one or more signals, the maximum signal strength corresponding to a maximum current load measured at the transceiver coil (see para. 0015, 0049; Figs. 4-5, wherein stronger coupling “corresponds to” a greater load at a transceiver coil); and
extracting, using the at least one processor of the audio signal receiving device, information from the first device upon the first device being in the at least one second position (see para. 0058).
Regarding claim 8, Champaneria discloses the method of claim 1, wherein a content of at least one prompt in the one or more prompts is different from at least another prompt in the one or more prompts and is determined based on the determined signal strength (see para. 0049; Figs. 4-5).
Regarding claim 9, Champaneria discloses the method of claim 8, wherein the content of the at least one prompt includes at least one of: an audio prompt, a video prompt, a graphics prompt, an image prompt, a textual prompt, and any combinations thereof (see para. 0049; Figs. 4-5).
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Champaneria (US 2015/0278803 A1) in view of Modi (US 2019/0228417 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Binder does not explicitly disclose, but Modi teaches, wherein the audio signal receiving device includes at least one of: one or more earphones, one or more headphones, one or more virtual reality devices, one or more augmented reality devices, one or more virtual reality glasses, one or more augmented reality glasses, and any combinations thereof (see para. 0035, 0064).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Bodi to include the feature taught by Modi.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make the modification to facilitate payments with a virtual reality headset device (see Modi, para. 0064, 0068).
Claims 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Champaneria (2015/0278803 A1) in view of Moghadam (US 2019/0378117 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Champaneria does not explicitly disclose, but Moghadam teaches wherein the first device is a contactless card (see para. 0016-0018).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Champaneria to include the features taught by Moghadam.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make the modification to enable a user to quickly and easily add an NFC-enabled funding card to a user account or mobile/cloud wallet (see Moghadam, para. 0024).
Regarding claim 4, Moghadam teaches wherein the contactless card, based on the establishing of the NFC exchange communication link, is configured to transmit to the audio signal receiving device a contactless card data, the contactless card data includes at least one of the following: an account number associated with the contactless card, a virtual account number associated with the contactless card, an expiration date associated with the contactless card, a card verification value (CVV) associated with the contactless card, a billing address associated with the contactless card, a name of a user associated with the contactless card, and any combination thereof (see para. 0019).
Regarding claim 5, Moghdam teaches wherein the contactless card includes at least one of the following: a credit card, a debit card, an electronic gift card, a pre-paid credit card, a pre-paid debit card, and any combination thereof (see para. 0016).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Champaneria (2015/0278803 A1) in view of Cordier (US 2022/0239335 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Champaneria does not explicitly disclose, but Cordier teaches wherein the signal strength is determined based on a current load measured at the transceiver coil (see para. 0049-0050).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Champaneria to include the feature of Cordier.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make the modification in order to guide the user to an optimal target position (see para. 0088).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Royston (US 2015/0229362 A1) discloses an NFC-enabled device including tag emulation circuitry and reader emulation circuitry operates so as to provide a signal strength meter function. The signal strength meter function, in tag emulation mode, measures and reports on how well the tag is coupled to a third party reader field. In reader emulation mode, the signal strength meter function measures and reports how well the reader of the NFC-enabled device couples to a tag that is being read. One exemplary method includes detecting an NFC reader field, operating reader receiver circuitry at the NFC-enabled device so as to at least determine the strength of a signal received from the reader field, generating information representative of the determined strength of the signal received from the reader field at a first time, and performing one or more predetermined actions based at least in part on the one or more signals representative of the determined strength. Predetermined actions may include generating visual, audio, and/or other indications of the received signal strength.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC T WONG whose telephone number is (571)270-3405. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm M-F.
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, Michael W Anderson can be reached at 571-270-0508. 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.
/ERIC T WONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3693
ERIC WONG
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3693
Prosecution Insights