DETAILED ACTION
This is first office action on the merits in response to the application filed on 03/06/2024.
Claims 1-16 were originally filed by the applicant.
Claims 1-16 were canceled and claims 17–32 were added in a preliminary amendment filed the same day as the application.
Claims 17-32 are currently pending and have been examined.
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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“token reference register, configured for receiving…” in claim 31.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 17-32 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, claims 17-29 are directed to a method, claims 30-32 are directed to a system. Therefore, these claims fall within the four statutory categories of invention.
The limitations of independent claim 17, have been denoted with letters by the Examiner for easy reference. The judicial exceptions recited in claim 17 are identified in bold below:
receiving transmission information from a first subscriber unit in a second subscriber unit;
creating a token-specific cryptographic key pair for a token to be transmitted in the second subscriber unit,
wherein a public part of the token-specific cryptographic key pair is obtained by applying a one-way cryptographic function to a generated private part of the token-specific key pair, the private part being a token element of the token to be transmitted;
sending the generated public part of the token-specific key pair from the second subscriber unit to the first subscriber unit;
creating a registration request for a token reference register of the transaction system at least comprising a token reference uniquely assigned to the token to be transmitted as a token reference to be registered,
wherein the token reference comprises at least one token value of the token and the generated public part of the token-specific key pair as token reference elements and a token reference assigned to a token of the first subscriber unit as a previously registered token reference; and
sending from the first subscriber unit to the second subscriber unit, a registration confirmation of the token reference register for the successful registration of the token reference to be registered, or the registration request to register the token reference to be registered in the token reference register.
Limitations A and E through G under the broadest reasonable interpretation covers steps or functions of commercial interactions. Other than reciting generic computer hardware in limitations and additional elements of generating and sending cryptographic keys, nothing in the claim element differentiates the limitation from commercial interactions. Therefore, limitations A and E through G recite an abstract idea, as highlighted above, that is consistent with the business relation aspects of certain methods of organizing human activities.
Accordingly, claim 17, recite an abstract idea and the analysis proceed to Step 2A.2.
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, claim 17 recites the additional elements in bold below:
receiving transmission information from a first subscriber unit in a second subscriber unit;
creating a token-specific cryptographic key pair for a token to be transmitted in the second subscriber unit,
wherein a public part of the token-specific cryptographic key pair is obtained by applying a one-way cryptographic function to a generated private part of the token-specific key pair, the private part being a token element of the token to be transmitted;
sending the generated public part of the token-specific key pair from the second subscriber unit to the first subscriber unit;
creating a registration request for a token reference register of the transaction system at least comprising a token reference uniquely assigned to the token to be transmitted as a token reference to be registered,
wherein the token reference comprises at least one token value of the token and the generated public part of the token-specific key pair as token reference elements and a token reference assigned to a token of the first subscriber unit as a previously registered token reference; and
sending from the first subscriber unit to the second subscriber unit, a registration confirmation of the token reference register for the successful registration of the token reference to be registered, or the registration request to register the token reference to be registered in the token reference register.
The additional element(s) in limitation A and E through G are recited at a high level of generality by implementing abstract idea on generic computer (MPEP § 2106.05(f)). The additional elements of generating and sending cryptographic keys of limitations B through D, generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment (MPEP § 2106.05(h)). As such, when the additional elements are considered individually and as an ordered combination, the claim as a whole amounts to no more than implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. Accordingly, the additional element(s) do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not recite any additional elements indicative of integration into a practical application. Rather, the claim as whole generally links the judicial exception to a technological environment defined by high level recitations of a computer. Therefore, the claim is directed to an abstract idea and the analysis proceeds to Step 2B.
The additional elements, both individually and as an ordered combination, do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the outcome of the considerations at Step 2B will be the same when the considerations from Step 2A.2 are reevaluated. As discussed under Step 2A.2, the additional element(s) amount to no more than generally link the abstract idea to a technological environment performed by a generic computer. Because those instructions embody the abstract idea, the claim itself is merely a recitation of the abstract idea and an instruction to “apply it” on a computer. This is not enough to provide an inventive concept. Therefore, claim 17 are not patent eligible.
Dependent claims 18 further recite a token transmission declaration of intent to transmit the token which is further reciting the abstract idea. The additional elements fail to recite a practical application nor significantly more than the abstract idea.
Dependent claims 19 further recite a token value which is further reciting the abstract idea. The claim does not recite additional elements that integrate the abstract idea to a practical application nor provide significantly more than the abstract idea.
Dependent claims 20 further recite sending registration confirmation which is further reciting the abstract idea. The additional elements fail to recite a practical application nor significantly more than the abstract idea.
Dependent claims 21 further recite transmit the token which is further reciting the abstract idea. The additional elements fail to recite a practical application nor significantly more than the abstract idea.
Dependent claims 22-23 further recite sending registration request which is further reciting the abstract idea. The additional elements fail to recite a practical application nor significantly more than the abstract idea.
Dependent claims 24 further recite receiving transmission information which is further reciting the abstract idea. The additional elements fail to recite a practical application nor significantly more than the abstract idea.
Dependent claims 25 further recite sending registration request and confirmation which is further reciting the abstract idea. The additional elements fail to recite a practical application nor significantly more than the abstract idea.
Dependent claims 26 further recite registration confirmation which is further reciting the abstract idea. The additional elements fail to recite a practical application nor significantly more than the abstract idea.
Dependent claims 27 further recite verifying registering of token which is further reciting the abstract idea. The additional elements fail to recite a practical application nor significantly more than the abstract idea.
Dependent claims 28 further recite token splitting which is further reciting the abstract idea. The additional elements fail to recite a practical application nor significantly more than the abstract idea.
Dependent claims 29 further recite token switching which is further reciting the abstract idea. The additional elements fail to recite a practical application nor significantly more than the abstract idea. The claim does not recite additional elements that integrate the abstract idea to a practical application nor provide significantly more than the abstract idea.
Dependent claims 30-32 further recite the system for perform the abstract idea. The additional elements fail to recite a practical application nor significantly more than the abstract idea.
In summary, the dependent claims considered both individually and as an ordered combination do not provide meaningful limitations to transform the abstract idea into a patent eligible application of the abstract idea such that the claims amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. The claims do not recite an improvement to another technology or technical field, an improvement to the functioning of the computer itself, or provide meaningful limitations beyond generally linking an abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
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 for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 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) 1-7, 10-17 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Florian (DE 102019002732 A), and further in view of Grendon (US 20190188704 A1).
With respect to claim 17:
Florian teaches (in italic):
receiving transmission information from a first subscriber unit in a second subscriber unit. (The first terminal M1 then transmits, which can transmit the electronic coin data record C<sub>i</sub>to a second terminal M2 [0095])
creating a registration request for a token reference register of the transaction system at least comprising a token reference uniquely assigned to the token to be transmitted as a token reference to be registered, wherein the token reference comprises at least one token value of the token and the generated public part of the token-specific key pair as token reference elements and a token reference assigned to a token of the first subscriber unit as a previously registered token reference. (The owner of the two values u<sub>i</sub>and r<sub>i</sub>is therefore in possession of the digital money. the digital money is defined by a pair consisting of a valid electronic coin data record and a corresponding masked electronic coin data record Z<sub>i</sub>. The masked electronic coin record Z<sub>i</sub>is obtained by applying a homomorphic one-way function f (C<sub>i</sub>) according to equation (2). The exchange of the electronic coin data record is thus secured, for example, by cryptographic keys, for example a session key negotiated for an electronic coin data record exchange or a symmetrical or asymmetrical key pair. [0040 0083])
sending from the first subscriber unit to the second subscriber unit, a registration confirmation of the token reference register for the successful registration of the token reference to be registered, or the registration request to register the token reference to be registered in the token reference register. (With the receipt of the electronic coin data record C<sub>i</sub><sup>*</sup>, the second terminal M2 is in possession of the digital money that the electronic coin data record C<sub>i</sub><sup>*</sup> represents. To check the validity of the received electronic coin data set C<sub>i</sub><sup>*</sup>, the masked transmitted electronic coin data set Z<sub>i</sub><sup>*</sup>is calculated in the second terminal M2 using the - public - one-way function from equation (3). The masked transmitted electronic coin data record Z<sub>i</sub><sup>*</sup>is then transmitted to the monitoring instance 2 and searched for there. [0096-0097])
Florian does not explicitly teach the following limitations. However,
Grendon teaches:
creating a token-specific cryptographic key pair for a token to be transmitted in the second subscriber unit, wherein a public part of the token-specific cryptographic key pair is obtained by applying a one-way cryptographic function to a generated private part of the token-specific key pair, the private part being a token element of the token to be transmitted. (In such an embodiment, the recipient's computing device may possess data necessary for use in decrypting the digital token, to prohibit use of the digital token without having the proper data. For example, the recipient's computing device may generate a cryptographic key pair consisting of a private key and public key [0025])
sending the generated public part of the token-specific key pair from the second subscriber unit to the first subscriber unit. (may provide the public key to the sender's computing device. The sender's computing device may encrypt the digital token with the recipient's public key before providing the encrypted token to the recipient 106. [0025])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system as disclosed by Florian to utilizing cryptographical keys with the technique as disclosed by Grendon to provide significantly greater security as Grendon suggested [0005].
With respect to claim 18:
Florian further teaches wherein the transmission information is a token- transmission declaration of intent to transmit the token to be transmitted from the first subscriber unit to the second subscriber unit. (The first terminal M1 then transmits, which can transmit the electronic coin data record C<sub>i</sub>to a second terminal M2 [0095])
With respect to claim 19:
Florian further teaches wherein the transmission information is the token value of the token to be transmitted. (The first terminal M1 then transmits, which can transmit the electronic coin data record C<sub>i</sub>to a second terminal M2 [0095])
With respect to claim 20:
Florian further teaches wherein before the sending of the registration confirmation the registration request is sent from the first subscriber unit to the token reference register and wherein the registration confirmation is sent from the token reference register to the first subscriber unit. (In the optional steps 101 and 102, a coin data record is requested and provided by the issuing entity 1 to the first terminal M1 after the electronic coin data record has been created. A signed masked electronic coin data record is sent to the monitoring entity 2 in step 103. In step 103, the obtained electronic coin data record C<sub>i</sub>is masked according to equation (3). Then in step 104 the masked electronic coin data record Z<sub>i</sub>in is registered in the monitoring instance 2. [0132])
With respect to claim 21:
Florian further teaches wherein the first subscriber unit, after obtaining the registration confirmation, transmits the token comprising the token value and the public part of the token- specific key pair to the second subscriber unit. (In step 105, the coin data record C is transmitted in the direct transaction layer 3 to the second terminal M2. [0132])
With respect to claim 24:
Florian further teaches wherein the transmission information is received indirectly by a transmission of the token of the first subscriber unit with a token value greater than a claimed token value. (An owner of an electronic coin data record C<sub>i</sub>must be able to prove to the monitoring entity 2 that all monetary amounts u<sub>i</sub>in a processing operation lie within a value range of [O, ... , n] without informing the monitoring entity 2 of the monetary amounts u<sub>i</sub>. [0094])
With respect to claim 25:
Florian further teaches wherein the registration request is sent from the second subscriber unit to the token reference register, wherein the registration request also comprises the claimed token value and wherein the registration confirmation is sent from the token reference register to the second subscriber unit. (The masked transmitted electronic coin data record Z<sub>i</sub><sup>*</sup>is then transmitted to the monitoring instance 2 and searched for there. If it matches a registered and valid masked electronic coin data record, the validity of the received coin data record C<sub>i</sub><sup>*</sup>is displayed to the second terminal M2 and it is deemed that the received electronic coin data record C<sub>i</sub><sup>*</sup>is the same as the registered electronic coin data record C<sub>i</sub>. [0097])
With respect to claim 26:
Florian further teaches wherein after the registration confirmation has been obtained, the token comprising the token value and the public part of the token-specific key pair is deemed to have been transmitted from the second subscriber unit to the first subscriber unit. (In one embodiment, the validity check can be used to determine that the received electronic coin data record C<sub>i</sub><sup>*</sup>is still valid, i.e. that it has not already been used in another processing step or in another transaction and/or has not been subject to further change. [0097])
With respect to claim 27:
Florian further teaches:
wherein for the purpose of registering in the token reference register, it is verified whether the at least one token reference of the received registration request is stored in the token reference register. (the validity of the received coin data record C<sub>i</sub><sup>*</sup>is displayed to the second terminal M2 and it is deemed that the received electronic coin data record C<sub>i</sub><sup>*</sup>is the same as the registered electronic coin data record C<sub>i</sub>. [0097])
storing the at least one token reference in a storage unit of the token reference register for the purpose of registering the token uniquely assigned to this token reference in the transaction system; if it is determined in the verification step that the at least one token reference of the received registration request is not stored in the token reference register. (the validity of the received coin data record C<sub>i</sub><sup>*</sup>is displayed to the second terminal M2 and it is deemed that the received electronic coin data record C<sub>i</sub><sup>*</sup>is the same as the registered electronic coin data record C<sub>i</sub>. In one embodiment, the validity check can be used to determine that the received electronic coin data record C<sub>i</sub><sup>*</sup>is still valid, i.e. that it has not already been used in another processing step or in another transaction and/or has not been subject to further change. [0097])
With respect to claim 28:
Florian further teaches:
wherein the token to be transmitted is obtained by a splitting step of the token of the first subscriber unit, wherein in order to split the token of the first subscriber unit the following method steps are carried out: splitting the token value of the token of the first subscriber unit into a first token subvalue and a second token subvalue, where the sum of the first token subvalue and the second token subvalue corresponds to the token value of the token to be split. (In the splitting step, the electronic coin data record of the second terminal is divided into the first partial electronic coin data record and the second partial electronic coin data record. The splitting is preferably done by, on the one hand, determining a monetary partial amount and a partial concealment amount. [0031])
receiving the token reference for the token to be transmitted from the second subscriber unit having the generated public part of the token-specific key pair of the token to be transmitted; creating a token reference for a split token in the first subscriber unit having the second token subvalue and a created public part of a token-specific key pair of the second split token. (After the splitting, the electronic coin data set to be split, the first electronic coin partial data set and the second electronic coin partial data set are masked in the second terminal by respectively applying the homomorphic one-way function to respectively obtain a masked electronic coin data set to be split, a masked first electronic coin partial data set and a masked second electronic coin partial data set. [0031])
creating the registration request comprising the token reference of the token of the first subscriber unit, the token reference for the token to be transmitted and the token reference for the split token. (The splitting of the masked electronic coin data record is then registered in the remote monitoring instance. [0031])
With respect to claim 29:
Florian further teaches wherein the token to be transmitted is obtained by a switching step of the token of the first subscriber unit, wherein in order to switch the token of the first subscriber unit the following method steps are carried out: receiving the token reference for the token to be transmitted from the second subscriber unit having the generated public part of the token-specific key pair of the token to be transmitted; creating the registration request comprising the token reference of the token of the first subscriber unit and the token reference for the token to be transmitted. (When switching, also called "switch", the electronic coin data record received from the first terminal results in a new electronic coin data record, preferably with the same monetary amount, the so-called electronic coin data record to be switched. [0029-0030])
With respect to claim 30:
Florian further teaches a transaction system comprising a plurality of subscriber units, each configured for the direct transmission of tokens according to claim 17. (transmitting electronic coin data records between terminal devices, a first terminal having at least one electronic coin data record, with the steps: transmitting the electronic coin data record from the first terminal to a second terminal [Abstract])
With respect to claim 31:
Florian further teaches:
a first subscriber unit, configured for sending transmission information for a token to be transmitted to a second subscriber unit. (transmitting electronic coin data records between terminal devices, a first terminal having at least one electronic coin data record, with the steps: transmitting the electronic coin data record from the first terminal to a second terminal [Abstract])
a token reference register, configured for receiving, from the first subscriber unit or the second subscriber unit, a registration request comprising at least one token reference uniquely assigned to the token to be transmitted as a token reference to be registered, wherein the token reference comprises at least one token value of the token and the generated public part of the token-specific key pair as token reference elements and a token reference assigned to a token of the first subscriber unit as a previously registered token reference. (With the receipt of the electronic coin data record C<sub>i</sub><sup>*</sup>, the second terminal M2 is in possession of the digital money that the electronic coin data record C<sub>i</sub><sup>*</sup>represents. To check the validity of the received electronic coin data set C<sub>i</sub><sup>*</sup>, the masked transmitted electronic coin data set Z<sub>i</sub><sup>*</sup>is calculated in the second terminal M2 using the - public - one-way function from equation (3). The masked transmitted electronic coin data record Z<sub>i</sub><sup>*</sup>is then transmitted to the monitoring instance 2 and searched for there. [0096-0097])
Grendon further teaches the first subscriber unit or a second subscriber unit, configured for creating a token-specific cryptographic key pair for the token to be transmitted, wherein a public part of the token-specific cryptographic key pair is obtained by applying a one-way cryptographic function to a generated private part of the token-specific key pair, the private part being a token element of the token to be transmitted. (In such an embodiment, the recipient's computing device may possess data necessary for use in decrypting the digital token, to prohibit use of the digital token without having the proper data. For example, the recipient's computing device may generate a cryptographic key pair consisting of a private key and public key [0025])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system to utilizing cryptographical keys with the technique as disclosed by Grendon to provide significantly greater security as Grendon suggested [0005].
With respect to claim 32:
Florian further teaches wherein the token reference register is an instance of a central currency system and each token is a digital central bank currency. (Preferably, the monitoring entity is provided for managing and checking masked electronic coin data records and is arranged in an issuer layer, in which an issuer entity is also arranged, and/or a monitoring layer. [0055])
Claim(s) 22-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over "Florian" and "Grendon" as applied to claim 17 above, and further in view of Choi (US 20080189186 A1).
With respect to claim 22:
Florian further teaches wherein […] to the token reference register, the registration request is sent to the token reference register either from the first subscriber unit or from the second subscriber unit, wherein a registration confirmation is sent from the token reference register to the subscriber unit sending the registration request to the token reference register. (In the optional steps 101 and 102, a coin data record is requested and provided by the issuing entity 1 to the first terminal M1 after the electronic coin data record has been created. A signed masked electronic coin data record is sent to the monitoring entity 2 in step 103. In step 103, the obtained electronic coin data record C<sub>i</sub>is masked according to equation (3). Then in step 104 the masked electronic coin data record Z<sub>i</sub>in is registered in the monitoring instance 2. [0132])
Florian in view of Grendon does not teach depending on the presence of a communication link. However,
Choi teaches depending on the presence of a communication link. (In order to accomplish the above object, the present invention provides an authentication and payment system for performing direct sales transactions offline between a merchant and a purchaser and mail order sales transactions using multimedia or printed media, such as terrestrial broadcasting, satellite broadcasting or catalogs, using a purchaser's mobile communication terminal capable of receiving messages and performing wireless Internet connection [0019])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system as disclosed by Florian in view of Grendon to be flexible on transmitting message depending on connection with the technique as disclosed by Choi to provide convenience and time savings to consumer as Choi suggests [0005].
With respect to claim 23:
Choi further teaches wherein the first subscriber unit provides a communication link between the second subscriber unit and the token reference register if the registration request is to be sent from the second subscriber unit to the token reference register, but the second subscriber unit has no communication link to the token reference register, or wherein the second subscriber unit provides a communication link between the first subscriber unit and the token reference register if the registration request is to be sent from the first subscriber unit to the token reference register, but the first subscriber unit has no communication link to the token reference register. (In order to accomplish the above object, the present invention provides an authentication and payment system for performing direct sales transactions offline between a merchant and a purchaser and mail order sales transactions using multimedia or printed media, such as terrestrial broadcasting, satellite broadcasting or catalogs, using a purchaser's mobile communication terminal capable of receiving messages and performing wireless Internet connection [0019])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system to be flexible on transmitting message depending on connection with the technique as disclosed by Choi to provide convenience and time savings to consumer as Choi suggests [0005].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20160261411 A1: Generating the wallet 1112 may be executed using programs that implement the following algorithm. 1. The user selects a “generate wallet” option on their mobile phone app 1108, and is instructed to swipe their token card device 1102; the app 1108 generates a “generate wallet” instruction which is emitted using the NFC interface. 2. The token card device 1102 receives a “generate wallet” instruction, generates an ECDSA wallet 1112, encrypts the wallet 1112 with the internal secret 1104, and transmits the encrypted wallet (as a “blob”) with a public key to the mobile computing device 1106. In some embodiments, the wallet 1112 may be any form of cryptocurrency wallet or cryptocurrency keypain. 3. The mobile computing device 1106 stores the blob and public key, and displays the public key to user. 4. The user can sync the blob to the cloud if required or useful.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZESHENG XIAO whose telephone number is (571)272-6627. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-5 M-F.
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, Patrick McAtee can be reached on (571) 272-7575. 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.
/Z.X./Examiner, Art Unit 3698
/PATRICK MCATEE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3698