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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
I. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
II. CLAIMS 1-9, 11-12, and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over VAISHNAVI (US 2020/0274900) in view of HARI (US 2025/0097219).
Per claim 1, VAISHNAVI teaches a computer-implemented method comprising:
receiving, by a processor, a permission from a user of a plurality of users to utilize a particular service associated with a device (paras 0066, 0070, 0116—receiving access permissions based on user role with the organization, administrator/executive users),
identifying, by the processor, a predetermined plurality of authentication rules associated with a profile of the user (paras 0056-64, 0181, 0189, 0216, 0218, 0244—performing authorization on user access and permissions, multifactor authentication and authorization policy, user profile attributes are authorized);
determining, by the processor, based on the predetermined plurality of authentication rules, a plurality of parameters associated with the device at a particular time period (paras 0048, 0070, 0074, 0088, 0149, 0169-170, 0246-251—determining authorized user credential attributes based on authentication and authorization policies/services/APIs and time limits),
dynamically comparing, by the processor, a set of controls associated with a current utilization of the service of the device to the plurality of parameters associated with the device (paras 0227, 0246-251—checking authorization and performing validation of user attributes and credentials associated with the device);
automatically generating, by the processor, an API call based on a comparison of the set of controls to the plurality of parameters (paras 0035, 0073-76, 0082, 0115, 0208-210, 0244—generating an API based on the attributes and microservices);
dynamically generating, by the processor, a plurality of unique schema-specific identifiers based on a generated API call associated with the set of controls established by the user (paras 0214-223, 0237-240, 0250-254—schema attributes, type, attribute behaviors and definitions based on API); and
automatically generating, by the processor, a provision utilizing at least one of the plurality of unique schema-specific identifiers to perform a particular action associated with the device (Abstract, paras 0018, 0092-93, 0134, 0140, 0250-254—schema for identifying attributes and template, providing a schema service that allows for utilization of a database schema, user performing an action in an application owned by the user).
VAISHNAVI teaches the method of claim 1, yet fail to explicitly teach that the user is a primary user. HARI teaches linking additional devices to a user in adding user to a shared account of the primary user (paras 0128-129, 0175, 0203). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to combine the teachings of VAISHNAVI and HARI for the purpose of provisioning a primary user who creates and own an account, which are well-known in the art for establishing a hierarchical user wherein the primary user of an account is able to control the account by sharing use and access with additional users as desired.
Claims 16 and 20 contain limitations that are substantially equivalent to the limitations of claim 1 and are therefore rejected under the same basis.
Per claim 2, VAISHNAVI and HARI teach the method of claim 1, VAISHNAVI further teaches the method wherein a primary user of the plurality users provides a permission to the device that allows other users of the plurality of user to utilize the particular service (paras 0056, 0066, 0244—access permissions for provisioning access to use a service or resource).
Per claim 3, VAISHNAVI and HARI teach the method of claim 1, VAISHNAVI further teaches wherein the particular service comprises an automatic authentication of a transfer of data between an account associated with the primary user and the device (paras 0048, 0055-60, 0067, 0070, 0104—authorizing user account and provisioning user accounts for selective devices; HARI: paras 0122, 0124, 0128-129—authorization and authentication of primary user account associated with the user device).
Claim 17 contains limitations that are substantially equivalent to the limitations of claim 3 and are therefore rejected under the same basis.
Per claim 4, VAISHNAVI and HARI teach the method of claim 1, VAISHNAVI further teaches wherein the plurality of parameters comprise an identity of the user utilizing the service, a location of the device, and a type of action associated with the user utilizing the service (paras 0065, 0104, 0134, 0137, 0215-218, 0220-223—device location, granting a user role resulting in a user provisioning action, behavior of the attributes, resource/data type; HARI: paras 0112, 0128, 0182, 0185-186, 0189, 0220, 0234—location and identity of user device and type of access capacity).
Per claim 5, VAISHNAVI and HARI teach the method of claim 1, HARI further teaches wherein the plurality of authentication rules comprise a plurality of received user preferences associated with account usage of a virtual credit card associated with an account of the primary user (para 0151—virtual credit card associated with user).
Claim 19 contains limitations that are substantially equivalent to the limitations of claim 5 and are therefore rejected under the same basis.
Per claim 6, VAISHNAVI and HARI teach the method of claim 5, HARI further teaches wherein the plurality of received user preferences comprise a predetermined area where the virtual card can be utilized by the plurality of users without the presence of the primary user and a refined list of users identified as authorized users that are permitted to access the account of the primary user from a remote location (paras 0151, 0200-205—virtual credit card associated with user, user selects the list of users associated with an application for primary user to add users for account sharing).
Per claim 7, VAISHNAVI and HARI teach the method of claim 1, HARI further teaches the method further comprising establishing the set of controls based on additional user preferences associated with the primary user that stipulate access to a plurality of virtual card numbers (paras 0128-129, 0151—primary user configures additional users to access the account, virtual credit card number associated with credit card account).
Per claim 8, VAISHNAVI and HARI teach the method of claim 1, VAISHNAVI further teaches wherein the API call comprises an interaction between the device communicating with an external computing device utilizing a plurality of requests and a plurality of responses (paras 0050, 0069, 0090, 0095-98, 0121-122, 0133-138, 0140—interaction between user device an external computing device for fulfilling access requests and retrieving data as it is being requested; HARI: paras 0013, 0022-23, 0028-29, 0096, 0099-0101—provisioning request and responses).
Per claim 9, VAISHNAVI and HARI teach the method of claim 1, HARI further teaches the method wherein each unique schema-specific identifier of the plurality of unique schema-specific identifiers comprises a plurality of virtual card numbers (para 0151—virtual credit card to mask credit card numbers).
Per claim 11, VAISHNAVI and HARI teach the method of claim 1, VAISHNAVI further teaches wherein the provision comprises a plurality of instructions that can be transmitted from the device to an external computing device to detail a subsequent performance of the particular action (paras 0029, 0031, 0097, 0104, 0134, 0214-215—granting a role to a user which results in a user provisioning action, attributes describing properties and behavior, performance of actions and service functions; HARI: paras 0088, 0095, 0187-188, 0191, 0207-208—authenticated application actions and permitted actions).
Per claim 12, VAISHNAVI and HARI teach the method of claim 1, HARI teaches the method further comprising adding an additional authorized user to the plurality of users by: receiving a request to add an additional user to an account of the primary user; receiving information relating to the additional user; receiving rule and limitation information associated with the additional user; and updating at least one database based on the information associated with the additional user (paras 0128-129, 0151, 0200-205—virtual credit card associated with user, user selects the list of users associated with an application for primary user to add users for account sharing).
Claim 18 contains limitations that are substantially equivalent to the limitations of claim 12 and are therefore rejected under the same basis.
Per claim 14, VAISHNAVI and HARI teach the method of claim 1, HARI teaches the method further comprising utilizing a natural language processing module to generate a notification detailing the provision associated with a plurality of virtual card numbers based on the performance of the particular action (paras 0078, 0151—virtual credit card to mask credit card numbers and delivering notifications/alerts about account statements and activity).
Per claim 15, VAISHNAVI and HARI teach the method of claim 1, VAISHNAVI further teaches wherein the profile of the primary users comprises an account associated with the primary user (paras 0056-64, 0181, 0189, 0216, 0218, 0244—performing authorization on user access and permissions, multifactor authentication and authorization policy, user profile attributes are authorized; HARI: para 0181—validation of user profile and identities).
III. CLAIMS 10 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over VAISHNAVI (US 2020/0274900) in view of HARI (US 2025/0097219) and QUIGLEY et al (US 2024/0346087).
Per claim 10, VAISHNAVI with HARI teach the method of claim 9, as applied above. While HARI teaches virtual credit card to mask credit card numbers (para 0151), HARI and VAISHNAVI both fail to explicitly teach wherein the plurality of virtual card numbers comprise a plurality of virtual hash values that may utilized to automatically authenticate a transaction associated with the service initiated by an authorized user. However, QUIGLEY et al teach hashing of virtual representation of goods and data using hashing algorithms and values to authenticate and verify transactions associated with authorized users (paras 0023, 0027, 0132, 0148, 0418).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to combine the teachings of VAISHNAVI with HARI and QUIGLEY et al for the purpose of provisioning virtual hash values by hashing algorithms, which are well-known in the art for authenticating transactions and financial data.
Per claim 13, VAISHNAVI with HARI teach the method of claim 1, as applied above, yet fail to explicitly further comprising utilizing an artificial intelligence module to predict a plurality of trends associated with the performance of the particular action and the provision based on a behavior pattern associated with an account of the primary user. However, QUIGLEY et al teach utilizing artificial intelligence to train and make predictions based on the machine learned models (paras 0160, 0235-236, 0785). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to combine the teachings of VAISHNAVI with HARI and QUIGLEY et al for the purpose of utilizing artificial intelligence to predict behavior using predictive analytics, which are well-known in the art from artificial intelligence techniques.
Conclusion
IV. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: US 2021/0266167, US 2019/0362083, US 2020/0051112.
V. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KRISTIE D SHINGLES whose telephone number is (571)272-3888. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday, 10am-7pm.
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, Kamal Divecha can be reached on 571-272-5863. 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.
/KRISTIE D SHINGLES/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2453