DETAILED ACTION
Acknowledgements
This Office Action is in response to Applicant’s response/application filed on 12/23/2025.
The Examiner notes that citations to United States Patent Application Publication paragraphs are formatted as [####], #### representing the paragraph number.
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 .
Status of Claims
No claims have been amended or added.
Claims 10 and 21 have been canceled.
Claims 1-9, 11-20, and 22 are currently pending and have been examined.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 7, 11, 12, 15, 18, 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sosa (US 20020099607).
Regarding claim(s) 1 and 12, Sosa discloses:
a stored value card having a plurality of activation states including an activated state and an unactivated state, the stored value card including: an encrypted token; a predefined card value; and a card identifier, whereby the predefined card value can be utilised for a transaction if the card is in the activated state and cannot be utilised for a transaction if the card is in the unactivated state (By disclosing, “Each card number is encoded onto a corresponding cash card, such as on the magnetic strip typically provided on "charge" cards, such as credit cards, debit cards, bank cards, etc.” ([0035]); “As shown, the card number XYZ 207 from the card numbers 109 is encoded on the magnetic strip 205 of the cash card 201” ([0044]); “the card information is routed to the cash account system as processor of the card number, where the cash account system verifies the card number contained in the magnetic stripe and PIN. If valid and activated, the cash account system determines if the cash balance of the account is sufficient to cover the withdrawal or purchase amount in a similar manner as typical credit purchases.” ([0037]); “brick and mortar merchants typically include a validation unit or card reader or the like for reading encoded charge numbers on magnetic strips on charge cards or the like.” ([0031]); and “Since the cash cards cannot be activated for online use until they have been validated offline…The cash account system 107 provides even more security, since accounts are tracked and deactivated if a security breach is discovered, leading to at least partial recovery of funds” ([0090]));
a token reader for retrieving the encrypted token from the stored value card (By disclosing, “brick and mortar merchants typically include a validation unit or card reader or the like for reading encoded charge numbers on magnetic strips on charge cards or the like.” ([0031])); and
a token validator in communication with the token reader for receiving the encrypted token and using the encrypted token to validate the predefined card value and the card identifier, the token validator having at least one database for storing card value information and card identifier information, wherein the predefined card value and the card identifier are each validated based on the card value information and card identifier information when the stored value card is in the unactivated state, further wherein the stored value card is able to be activated and/or validated without being connected to a registered user of the system (By disclosing, “Each card number is encoded onto a corresponding cash card, such as on the magnetic strip typically provided on "charge" cards… Each cash card is first validated…For example, at the point of sale (POS) to the user, the cash card is swiped by a clerk into a card reader for validation. The information on the magnetic strip, including the card number, is forwarded via the charge settlement network to the cash account system [(token validator)] as processor of the card number, which validates the cash card and the corresponding card number. Upon subsequent activation as described further below, the cash card with the card number may be used in a similar manner as a debit card” ([0035]); “The PIN 329, the desired cash amount 515 and the information on the magnetic strip 205 including the card number XYZ 207 is forwarded by the ATM 509 and the switch network 315 of the charge settlement network 115 to the cash account system 107 as processor. The transaction and account system 119 of the cash account system 107 verifies the card number XYZ and the PIN 329 and verifies or otherwise compares the information with the USER1 account 325. The cash amount 515 is compared with the account balance 331 of the USER1 account 325.” ([0057]); “The valid card database 317 includes other information that is associated and stored with the particular validated card number XYZ 207. The associated information may be retrieved from the inactive card database 301 if initially stored there, or is retrieved via the charge settlement network 115 from the magnetic strip 205 and any other transaction information forwarded via the charge settlement network 115. In particular, the valid card database 317 stores the validated card number XYZ 207 along with the cash or purchase amount 304 and a distributor or promoter identifier 333 identifying the particular distributor merchant PQR associated with the cash card 201.” ([0049])).
Regarding claim(s) 4 and 15, Sosa discloses:
wherein the stored value card includes a magnetic stripe and the token reader retrieves the token by reading the magnetic stripe (By disclosing, “For example, at the point of sale (POS) to the user, the cash card is swiped by a clerk into a card reader for validation. The information on the magnetic strip, including the card number, is forwarded via the charge settlement network to the cash account system [(token validator)] as processor of the card number, which validates the cash card and the corresponding card number.” ([0035])).
Regarding claim(s) 7 and 18, Sosa discloses:
a secure communication channel for facilitating communication between the token reader and the token validator ([0028]).
Regarding claim(s) 11 and 22, Sosa discloses:
wherein the predefined card value and the card identifier are each validated based on the card value information and card identifier information when the stored value card is in the activated state (By disclosing, “the transaction and account system 119 receives a card number, a PIN and a purchase amount. The transaction and account system 119 verifies whether the received card number is the same as any activated card number in the accounts database 323. For the cash card 201, for example, transaction and account system 119 accesses the USER1 account 325 from the accounts database 323. The transaction and account system 119 determines if enough funds are available in the USER1 account 325 for the purchase transaction, such as comparing the purchase amount of the transaction with the cash balance 331. If the received card number is activated and if the purchase amount 304 does not exceed the cash balance 331 of the USER1 account 325, then the purchase transaction is authorized and accepted by the cash account system 107.” ([0056])).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 2, 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sosa (US 20020099607), in view of Liu (US 20020120499).
Regarding claim(s) 2 and 13, Sosa discloses:
wherein the status is one of: a validated status whereby the predefined card value and the card identifier are successfully validated; and an unvalidated status whereby the predefined card value and the card identifier not successfully validated (By disclosing, “ If the received card number is activated and if the purchase amount 304 does not exceed the cash balance 331 of the USER1 account 325, then the purchase transaction is authorized and accepted by the cash account system 107. If approved, the processor system 113 returns authorization information, such as authorization codes or the like, to the merchant DEF via the charge settlement network 115. The merchant DEF respondingly accepts payment via the cash card 201. Otherwise, the cash account system 107 denies the transaction and the processor system 113 returns denial information, such as denial codes or the like, to the merchant DEF via the charge settlement network 115.” ([0056])).
Sosa does not disclose, but Liu teaches:
a display for outputting a status of the stored value card (By disclosing, “the merchant membership server 170 checks the validity and expiration date of the card, and replies to the POS terminal 160 with the privileges to which the card holder is entitled. The POS terminal 160 displays the verification result to the store's clerk and the consumer in step 340.” ([0040] of Liu)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the invention of Sosa in view of Liu to include a display for outputting a status of the stored value card. Doing so would result in an improved invention because this would allow the store’s clerk to acknowledge the status of the card and cancel the transaction if the card is not validated.
Claim(s) 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 14, 16, 17, 19, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sosa (US 20020099607), in view of Thome (US 10692059).
Regarding claim(s) 3 and 14, Sosa does not disclose, but Thome teaches:
wherein the stored value card includes a QR code and the token reader retrieves the token by reading the QR code (By disclosing, “The term “swipe” refers in this description to any manner of triggering a card reader to read a card, such as passing a card through a magnetic stripe reader, smartcard reader, optical code reader, radio frequency identification (RFID) reader, etc. The terms “payment object” or “proxy object” refer in this description to any object that can be used to make an electronic payment, such as a mobile device via a digital wallet application.” (Col 2 line 58- Col 3 line 15 of Thome); and “object 250 can be a magnetic stripe card, a smart card, a proximity card, a re-programmable magnetic stripe card, an card containing an optical code such as a quick response (QR) code or a bar code, or a biometrically identifiable object, such as a finger, a hand, an iris, a retina, or a face, among others.” (Col 8 lines 57-63 of Thome)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the invention of Sosa in view of Thome to include techniques of wherein the stored value card includes a QR code and the token reader retrieves the token by reading the QR code. Doing so would result in an improved invention because this would allow the token reader to read the card information via various methods.
Regarding claim(s) 5 and 16, Sosa does not disclose, but Thome teaches:
wherein the stored value card includes an embedded passive RFID tag and the token reader retrieves the token by reading the RFID tag. (By disclosing, “The term “swipe” refers in this description to any manner of triggering a card reader to read a card, such as passing a card through a magnetic stripe reader, smartcard reader, optical code reader, radio frequency identification (RFID) reader, etc. The terms “payment object” or “proxy object” refer in this description to any object that can be used to make an electronic payment, such as a mobile device via a digital wallet application.” (Col 2 line 58- Col 3 line 15 of Thome); and “In embodiments where object 250 is a proximity card, object identifier 255 can cause the proximity card to transmit information associated with the proximity card, such as a radio frequency identification (RFID), which object identifier 255 can receive.” (Col 9 lines 62-66 of Thome)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the invention of Sosa in view of Thome to include techniques of wherein the stored value card includes an embedded passive RFID tag and the token reader retrieves the token by reading the RFID tag. Doing so would result in an improved invention because this would allow the token reader to read the card information via various methods.
Regarding claim(s) 6 and 17, Sosa does not disclose, but Thome teaches:
wherein the stored value card includes an embedded active transmitter and the token reader retrieves the token by receiving a transmitted signal from the transmitter. (By disclosing, “The term “swipe” refers in this description to any manner of triggering a card reader to read a card, such as passing a card through a magnetic stripe reader, smartcard reader, optical code reader, radio frequency identification (RFID) reader, etc. The terms “payment object” or “proxy object” refer in this description to any object that can be used to make an electronic payment, such as a mobile device via a digital wallet application.” (Col 2 line 58- Col 3 line 15 of Thome); and “In embodiments where object 250 is a proximity card, object identifier 255 can cause the proximity card to transmit information associated with the proximity card, such as a radio frequency identification (RFID), which object identifier 255 can receive.” (Col 9 lines 62-66 of Thome)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the invention of Sosa in view of Thome to include techniques of wherein the stored value card includes an embedded active transmitter and the token reader retrieves the token by receiving a transmitted signal from the transmitter. Doing so would result in an improved invention because this would allow the token reader to read the card information via various methods.
Regarding claim(s) 8 and 19, Sosa does not disclose, but Thome teaches:
wherein the token reader is a smartphone having a dedicated reader software application. (By disclosing, “The term “swipe” refers in this description to any manner of triggering a card reader to read a card, such as passing a card through a magnetic stripe reader, smartcard reader, optical code reader, radio frequency identification (RFID) reader, etc. The terms “payment object” or “proxy object” refer in this description to any object that can be used to make an electronic payment, such as a mobile device via a digital wallet application.” (Col 2 line 58- Col 3 line 15 of Thome)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the invention of Sosa in view of Thome to include techniques of wherein the token reader is a smartphone having a dedicated reader software application. Doing so would result in an improved invention because this would allow the token reader to read the card information via various methods.
Regarding claim(s) 9 and 20, Sosa does not disclose, but Thome teaches:
wherein the token reader is a scanning device coupled to one or more of: a computer system; or a kiosk.
(By disclosing, “The term “card reader” refers in this description to any object that can be used to obtain information from an object used to make an electronic payment where the card reader must be in the general vicinity of the object, such as an optical scanner, a near field communications device, a Bluetooth communications device, etc.” (Col 2 line 58- Col 3 line 15, and Fig. 3A of Thome)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the invention of Sosa in view of Thome to include techniques of wherein the token reader is a scanning device coupled to one or more of: a computer system; or a kiosk. Doing so would result in an improved invention because this would allow the computer to generate an authorization request for the transaction based on the card information received.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with regard to the 35 U.S.C. § 102 and 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejections have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
The Applicant argues that the cited prior art Sosa does not disclose an “encrypted token” and using a token for validation in an “unactivated state”.
The Examiner, respectfully disagrees. The Examiner notes that Sosa discloses an encrypted token by disclosing “Each card number is encoded onto a corresponding cash card, such as on the magnetic strip typically provided on "charge" cards, such as credit cards, debit cards, bank cards, etc.” ([0035]); and “As shown, the card number XYZ 207 from the card numbers 109 is encoded on the magnetic strip 205 of the cash card 201” ([0044]). Encryption is the process of converting an original representation of information into an alternative form. For example, a string of “4321” is an encrypted token for “1234” by writing “1234” backward. Therefore, the card number “XYZ 207” in Sosa is the encrypted token for the original card number 109.
The examiner also notes that using a token for validation in an “unactivated state” by disclosing “Since the cash cards cannot be activated for online use until they have been validated offline…The cash account system 107 provides even more security, since accounts are tracked and deactivated if a security breach is discovered, leading to at least partial recovery of funds” ([0090]), which means the cash card is validated offline in the unactivated mode and if the validation is successful, the cash card will be activated.
Accordingly, the 35 U.S.C. § 102 and 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejections will be maintained.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
WO 2012027664 to Harper for disclosing:
A financial account system includes a stored-value card, a first financial account directly accessible via the stored-value card and a second financial account associated with the first financial account. Funds may be transferred between the first and the second financial account. The transfers between the first and the second financial account may be automatic, recurring, or one-time events and wherein the automatic, recurring, or one-time events may be transacted regardless of a current balance of the first financial account and/or the second financial account. The balances associated with the first and/or the second financial accounts may be used to collateralize loans.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 DUAN ZHANG whose telephone number is (571)272-4642. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 10 AM-5 PM.
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, Neha Patel can be reached at 571-270-1492. 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.
/DUAN ZHANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3699