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
Claim Status
Claims 1, 9 and 17 are amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments regarding the 101 rejection have been considered but are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that a technical problem in the technical field of transfer service systems is enabling customers of entities having a limited transfer service software implementation that does not allow for the local use of transfer tags to nonetheless effectively register their accounts with desired transfer tags. As discussed in paragraphs [0020]-[0023], [0025]-[0027], and [0067], the pending claims provide a technical solution to this technical problem.
The Office asserts that the applicants arguments are unclear. For example, applicant argues that entities having a limited transfer service software implementation do not allow for the local use of transfer tags. The applicant does not however, explain wat this means. Applicant does not explain what a limited transfer service is or what is meant by “local use” of transfer tags. Para. 0026 of the specification discloses that users may create unique transfer tags for a variety of different accounts and that users may generally have a limited number of phone numbers and/or email addresses available for registering with the various accounts. According to the specification, this problem is somehow solved by the present invention. The examiner is unclear how this process is different from creating a unique Gmail address or yahoo.com address when needed. Again, the technical problem is unclear.
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 1-6, 8-14, 16-18 and 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):
1. A computer-implemented method, comprising:
receiving, by a provider computing system, a desired transfer tag from a user device;
performing, by the provider computing system, a tag conversion process on the desired transfer tag to create a desired-tag-based identifier corresponding to the desired transfer tag;
subsequent to performing the tag conversion process, verifying, by the provider computing system, an availability of both the desired transfer tag and the desired-tag-based identifier by communicating the desired-tag-based identifier to a transfer service computing system, wherein a portion of the desired-tag-based identifier is configured to be recognized by the transfer service computing system and allows for the transfer service computing system to confirm the availability of both the desired transfer tag and the desired-tag- based identifier; and
registering, by the provider computing system, an account of a user associated with the user device for a transfer service provided by the transfer service computing system using the desired-tag-based identifier based on the desired tag and the desired tag-based identifier being available.
The underlined elements of the claim represent certain methods of organizing human activity, commercial interactions related to sales activities or managing personal behavior or interactions between people including social activities because the registration of the tag-based identifier is for a transfer service.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional limitations. The additional limitations being the provider computer system, user device, and transfer service computing system, all of which are generically recited and perform generically recited tasks. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the claims merely. Claims 9 and 17 are similarly rejected.
The dependent claims merely narrow the abstract idea and, as a whole and in combination the claims comprise only the abstract idea and the words “apply it”.
Conclusion
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