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
Election/Restrictions
The following patentably distinct species are disclosed: Species A (Claims 1-7,11,12,14,15,16), Species B (Claims 8,9), Species C (Claims 10), Species D (Claim 13). The species are independent or distinct because Species A is directed towards a system operative for digital receipts at a merchant POS, , Species B is directed towards a system operative for digital receipts at a self service kiosk, Species C is directed towards a system operative for digital receipts for online purchase, Species D is directed towards a system operative for digital receipts for a merchant portal. Species A,B, C and D appear to correspond to embodiments described in applicant’s Figures 1,2,3,4 respectively. In addition, these species are not obvious variants of each other based on the current record.
In an email with Rebecca Stadler on 9/12/25, a provisional election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention of Species A, claims 1-7,11,12,14,15,16. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to this Office action. Claims 8-10,13 are withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
There is a search and/or examination burden for the patentably distinct species as set forth above because one or more of the following reason(s) apply:
(a) the inventions have acquired a separate status in the art in view of their different classification;
(b) the inventions have acquired a separate status in the art due to their recognized divergent subject matter;
(c) the inventions require a different field of search (for example, searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search queries);
(d) the prior art applicable to one invention would not likely be applicable to another invention;
(e) the inventions are likely to raise different non-prior art issues under 35 U.S.C. 101 and/or 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph.
Status of the Claims
Claims 8-10,13 are withdrawn
Claims 1-7,11,12,14,15,16 are under examination.
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 1-7,11,12,14,15,16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. Regarding independent claims 1,5 the claimed invention recites an abstract idea without significantly more.
The limitations on
to scan QR codes generated by a merchant at the time of transaction
to securely store digital receipts collected through … scanning upon completion of a transaction
recite the abstract idea of storing digital receipts which is a “Method of Organizing Human Activity” relating to the managing human behavior and interactions.
The additional elements in the claim
a mobile application configured for installation on a mobile device, said mobile application enabled…; an online customer portal accessible via web, configured to allow customers to log in and manage their digital receipts; and a centralized database communicatively connected to said mobile application and online customer portal, said database configured … QR code
appear to be a recitation of generic computer elements.
Thus, the claims recite an abstract idea.
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The computers are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. The additional element(s) does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Simply implementing the abstract idea on a generic computer environment is not a practical application of the abstract idea and does not take the claim out of the method of organizing human activity grouping.
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above, with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element app, mobile device, portal, database amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using generic computer components cannot provide an inventive conceptCollecting, analyzing and displaying information, and receiving and transmitting over a network are conventional in the computing arts. (MPEP 2106.05h; See also MPEP 2106.05, Alice v. CLS, “. Nearly every computer will include a ‘communications controller’ and ‘data storage unit’ capable of performing the basic calculation, storage, and transmission functions required by the method claims.”; see also MPEP 2106, “The courts have recognized the following computer functions as well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions when they are claimed in a merely generic manner (e.g., at a high level of generality) or as insignificant extra-solution activity… v. Electronically scanning or extracting data from a physical document, Content Extraction and Transmission, LLC v. Wells Fargo Bank, 776 F.3d 1343, 1348, 113 USPQ2d 1354, 1358 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (optical character recognition);. ). The claims are not patent eligible.
Regarding the dependent claims, these claims are directed to limitations which serve to limit the receipt storage steps. The subject matter of claims 2 (qr generator) ,3 (user interface), 4 (cloud storage), 6/14 (display qr), 7 (manage receipts) , 11 (transaction identifier), 12 (user authentication), 15 (organize receipts), 16 (transfer receipt) appear to add additional steps to the abstract idea, implemented by generic computers. These claims neither introduce a new abstract idea nor additional limitations which are significantly more than an abstract idea. They provide descriptive details that offer helpful context, but have no impact on statutory subject matter eligibility.
Therefore the limitations on the invention, when viewed individually and in ordered combination are directed to in-eligible subject matter.
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 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.
Claims 1-7,11,12,14,15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Liu 20190066079
Regarding Claim 1
a mobile application configured for installation on a mobile device, said mobile application enabled to scan QR codes generated by a merchant at the time of transaction;
(Liu, para 0045-46, “In such instance, the customer would scan or capture the scan-able code displayed and then the receipt management app of the customer would add identifier information such as timestamps, location information, or other similar information by executions of the receipt management app upon the scanning or capture operation. The receipt management app is a separate and independent app then the payment applications used by the merchant which the customer uses for payment.
[0046] In an exemplary embodiment, a snap-in agent incorporated in the payment app for accessing the receipt management app of the merchant or a server connected to the receipt management app platform. In addition, the merchant may configure the receipt management app with options were the customer may choose to use a separate app to receive the virtual receipt information or may simply execute a snap-in-agent 530 that is embedded in a transactional app used with a transaction with the merchant. Further, the snap-in-agent 530 may be configured to use the scan-able code information that is scanned during the financial transaction. In other words, a one-step scanning process of the scan-able code would suffice and the snap-in-agent can capture the merchant identifier of the scan-able code and then add additional unique information of the transaction creating unique labels that are identifiable only by the customer and merchant such as time stamps etc. to uniquely label the record of the virtual receipt for further retrieval at a later stage.”)
an online customer portal accessible via web, configured to allow customers to log in and manage their digital receipts; and
(Liu, para 0024, “For example, the scan-able code 130 like a QR-code may allow routing to a personal storage cloud 160 or alternatively to other websites or third party cloud repositories. In some instances, the scan-able code 130 includes functionality that links to website etc. The scan-able code 130 like the QR-code may contain a website address URL pointing to a ledger of the virtual receipt information. The QR-code allows for easy access to a website without a customer typing any web addresses into his/her mobile device 140 or smartphone.”)
a centralized database communicatively connected to said mobile application and online customer portal, said database configured to securely store digital receipts collected through QR code scanning or direct account transfer from a merchant portal upon completion of a transaction.
(Liu, para 0055, “[0055] At task 820, the merchant POS generates receipt data and identifiers associated with the particular customer of the transaction such as receipt data related to items or services purchases by the customer and identifiers such as timestamp information when the transaction is performed. At task 830, the merchant stores the receipt data and identifiers at the app storage cloud. In addition, at task 830 any updates related to the receipt or transaction data may also be stored at the app storage cloud including an updated QR code URL. The app storage cloud is encrypted and accessible by the merchant and the particular record is also accessible by the customer using the receipt management app and the data extracted from the captured QR-code which may link to the updated QR code URL. The app storage cloud, in addition, may be configured in a number of ways to contain the receipt data of all the merchant customers, limited to a particular store, or limited to a particular period. In some instances, the receipt information is saved in the block ledger of a database of the app storage cloud.”)
Regarding Claim 2, Liu discloses the system of claim 1
further comprising a QR code generation module integrated with the merchant's point of sale (POS) system, configured to generate QR codes representing transactional data for display at physical or online checkout points.
(Liu, para 0006, “[0006] FIG. 1 is an exemplary diagram illustrating scan-able codes generated by the merchant for a computing platform using a receipt management app for distributing virtual receipts to customers in accordance with an embodiment;”)
Regarding Claim 3, Liu discloses the system of claim 1
wherein the mobile application comprises user interface screens configured for the management of digital receipts, including an initial interaction screen for QR code scanning and
(Liu, fig.1 )
specific receipt screens detailing individual transactions.
(Liu, para 0059, “[0059] At task 855, in a personal cloud storage flow scheme, the receipt management app access a personal storage cloud to retrieve the virtual receipt via the personal storage cloud. At task 860, the receipt management app may access the app storage cloud. At task 865, the customer may retrieve virtual receipt data. At task 870, the customer may retrieve the virtual receipt for display etc.”)
Regarding Claim 4, Liu discloses the system of claim 1
wherein the mobile application and online customer portal provide secure cloud storage of digital receipts, ensuring accessibility and data integrity.
See prior art rejection of claim 1.
Regarding Claim 4, Liu discloses the system of claim 1
Regarding claim 5,6
See prior art rejection of claim 1.
Regarding Claim 7, Liu discloses the method of claim 5
further comprising enabling the customer to manage digital receipts within the mobile application or online customer portal, including viewing, organizing, and accessing detailed views of receipts stored in the centralized database.
See prior art rejection of claim 3.
Regarding claim 11, Liu discloses the system of claim 1.
wherein the QR codes include data encoding a transaction identifier linked to the digital receipt.
(Liu, abstract, “generating, by the merchant POS, identifying data for the customer by combining data from the scan-able code with identifying data generated by the merchant POS relating to the transaction wherein the identifying data includes identifiers of one or more of: time stamp data of the transaction, data about items or services purchased in the transaction; and random data generated by the merchant POS during the time of the transaction and sending, by the merchant POS using the computing platform, the identifying data to an app cloud storage wherein the app cloud storage is configured as a block chain ledger accessible by the customer.”)
Regarding claim 12, Liu discloses the system of claim 1.
wherein the centralized database supports secure user authentication procedures to access digital receipts.
(Liu, para 0072, “In accordance with one non-limiting example, the service cloud 1000 is implemented in the form of an on-demand multi-tenant customer relationship management (CRM) system that can support any number of authenticated users for a plurality of tenants.”)
Regarding claim 14, Liu discloses the system of claim 5.
wherein the QR code is displayed on a digital display at the merchant’s point of sale.
(Liu, para 0056, “[0056] At task 840, the customer scans the QR code. That is, at task 835, the QR code is displayed at the merchant POS for scanning or capture by the client. If the customer elects for a virtual receipt, the customer at task 840 would scan the QR-code.”)
Regarding claim 15, Liu discloses the system of claim 5.
wherein the stored digital receipts are organized in the centralized database by transaction date, merchant, or user specified categories.
(Liu, para 0025, “The receipt management app 150 is configured to manage the receipts, that is the receipt may be categorized per retailer names, types of products, dates when bought, and this information including any metadata derived during the transaction by the mobile device 140 will be stored in the app storage cloud 120.”)
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 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.
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 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 of this title, 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 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu 20190066079 in view of Official Notice
Regarding claim 16, Liu discloses the system of claim 5.
Liu does not explicitly disclose
further comprising logging into a user account via the online customer portal to initiate automatic digital receipt transfer for online transactions.
However, the limitation is obvious in view official notice. The examiner takes official notice that it is old and well known for users to log into portal to transfer information. For example, a customer could log into a credit card portal and download a record of the customer’s transactions. It can be seen that all the claimed elements are taught by Liu or Official notice. Login and information transfer by official notice does not change the functions taught by Liu. Aggregating digital receipt information would be performed the same way independent how it is later disseminated. Since the function of the elements in Liu and official notice do not interfere with each other the results would be predictable. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary still in the art to include in the system of Liu portal login and information transfer by official notice since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Conclusion
Relevant art not relied on but made of record include
“Digibon's mission: no more paper receipts of any kind “, 2019, https://www.nvnom.com/media/stories/the-mission-of-digibon-no-any-more-paper-receipt/
“That's why Digibon was launched: a system that replaces paper receipts with a digital copy. Maatman: "This has to be done step by step, we noticed. Ideally, we would like to see receipts sent directly to the customer's smartphone. The customer then chooses the app in which to store the receipts, such as a banking app. This is already possible at Bunq - convenient for consumers because it allows them to keep all receipts and guarantees together, smart for business owners because they can link to an accounting package." Until this system is integrated everywhere, they are now working with QR codes on receipts or at the checkout. "Van der Valk has been using this functionality satisfactorily for some time. The QR code is scanned and the receipt appears in the smartphone."”
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALLEN C CHEIN whose telephone number is (571)270-7985. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am -5pm.
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, Florian Zeender can be reached at (571) 272-6790. 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.
/ALLEN C CHEIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627