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 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 an abstract idea without significantly more. In the instant case, claim 1 is directed to a “computer implemented method”. Claim 1 is directed to the concept of “using rules to activate a payment instrument” and “authenticating a user” which is grouped under “organizing human activity… fundamental economic practice (authenticating a user before activation of an instrument is a form of risk mitigation), commercial or legal interactions (collecting authentication information is similar to the business relation of processing information through a clearing house)” in prong one of step 2A (See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance). Claim 1 recites accessing the stored one or more computing device activation keys upon verifying one or more user authentication keys, receiving, using the at least one processor, one or more contactless card activation keys, the one or more contactless card activation keys being stored by the contactless card, and activating, using the at least one processor, the contactless card based on a determination that the received one or more contactless card activation keys match the stored one or more computing device activation keys. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea (See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance). This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because, when analyzed under prong two of step 2A (See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance), the additional elements of the claim such as a processor, a computing device, a non-transitory storage media, and a server 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 (MPEP 2106.05(f)&(h)). 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 (i.e. implement) the acts of using rules to activate a payment instrument.
When analyzed under step 2B (See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance), 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 claims merely describe the concept of using rules to activate a payment instrument using computer technology (e.g. a processor and a computing device). 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)).
Dependent claims 2-9 and 11-19 do not remedy the deficiencies of the independent claims and are rejected accordingly. The dependent claims further refine the abstract idea of the independent claims and do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application In this case, all claims have been reviewed and are found to be substantially similar and linked to the same abstract idea (see Content Extraction and Transmission LLC v. Wells Fargo (Fed. Cir. 2014)).
Drawings
The drawing Fig 14 is objected to because the drawing is not of sufficient quality to permit adequate reproduction (37 CFR 1.184(l)), all lines, numbers, and figures are not sufficiently dense and dark, and the drawing should be in black and white without graying or shading. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Cook US 12450591.
As per claims 1 and 20:
Cook discloses a computer implemented method, comprising: executing, using at least one processor, an application on a computing device upon the computing device detecting a contactless card to be located within a predetermined distance of the computing device, the computing device storing one or more computing device activation keys, the contactless card being an inactive contactless card (Fig 4 ‘401’, col. 15 l. 60-col. 16 l.4);
accessing, using the at least one processor, the stored one or more computing device activation keys upon verifying one or more user authentication keys received in response to the executing (Figs 8, 9, 10; col. 24 l. 34-col.25 l.13);
receiving, using the at least one processor, one or more contactless card activation keys, the one or more contactless card activation keys being stored by the contactless card (Figs 8, 9, 10; col. 24 l. 34-col.25 l.13); and
activating, using the at least one processor, the contactless card based on a determination that the received one or more contactless card activation keys match the stored one or more computing device activation keys (Fig. 7B, Figs 8 ‘806’, 9 ‘926’; col. 24 l. 34-col.25 l.13).
As per claim 2:
Cook further discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the activating includes sending the received one or more contactless card activation keys and the stored one or more computing device activation keys to at least one server, the at least one server being communicatively coupled to the computing device (Fig. 7B, Figs 8 ‘806’, 9 ‘926’; col. 24 l. 34-col.25 l.13).
As per claim 3:
Cook further discloses the method according to claim 2, wherein the at least one server is configured to execute a comparison of the received one or more contactless card activation keys and the stored one or more computing device activation keys (col. 31 ll.15-41);
determine, based on the comparison, whether the received one or more contactless card activation keys match the stored one or more computing device activation keys (col. 31 ll.15-41);
upon a determination of a match between the received one or more contactless card activation keys and the stored one or more computing device activation keys, transmit an activation signal to the contactless card to activate the contactless card (col. 31 ll.15-41, figs 7B, 8, and 9); and
upon a failure to determine a match between the received one or more contactless card activation keys and the stored one or more computing device activation keys, prevent transmission of the activation signal to the contactless card (col. 31 ll.15-41; col. 28 ll.30-43).
As per claim 4:
Cook further discloses the method according to claim 3, wherein the at least one server is configured to transmit the one or more computing device activation keys to the computing device (Fig. 8, col. 23 ll. 12-64).
As per claim 5:
Cook further discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the executing includes executing a near-field communication (NFC) exchange between the contactless card and the computing device upon the contactless card being detected by the computing device to be located within the predetermined distance of the computing device (Fig 4 ‘401’, col. 15 l. 60-col. 16 l.4).
As per claim 6:
Cook further discloses the method according to claim 5, wherein the executing includes automatically triggering, based on the NFC exchange, generation of at least one user interface, the at least one user interface including one or more prompts for entry of the one or more user authentication keys (col. 29 ll.40-34, see also figs 11&12).
As per claim 7:
Cook further discloses the method according to claim 6, wherein the one or more user authentication keys includes at least one of the following: a facial recognition data, a fingerprint data, a biometric data, a username and a password, a multi-factor authentication token, and any combination thereof (col. 29 ll.40-34, see also figs 11&12).
As per claim 8
Cook further discloses the method according to claim 1, 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 (col. 3 ll.62-63).
As per claim 9:
Cook further discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the computing device is configured to execute a comparison of the received one or more contactless card activation keys and the stored one or more computing device activation keys (col. 31 ll.15-41);
determine, based on the comparison, whether the received one or more contactless card activation keys match the stored one or more computing device activation keys (col. 31 ll.15-41);
upon a determination of a match between the received one or more contactless card activation keys and the stored one or more computing device activation keys, transmit an activation signal to the contactless card to activate the contactless card (col. 31 ll.15-41, figs 7B, 8, and 9); and
upon a failure to determine a match between the received one or more contactless card activation keys and the stored one or more computing device activation keys, prevent transmission of the activation signal to the contactless card (col. 31 ll.15-41; col. 28 ll.30-43).
As per claims 10-19: Claims 10-19 are rejected under the rationales of claims 1-9.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Hart US 2020/0104830.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID P SHARVIN whose telephone number is (571)272-9863. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 am - 5 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, Ryan 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.
/DAVID P. SHARVIN/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3692
/DAVID P SHARVIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3692