DETAILED ACTION
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 Status
The claims filed on 10/15/2025 have been entered.
Claims 1, 3-6, and 8 are pending.
Claims 1 and 3-5 are currently amended.
Claims 6 and 8 are previously presented.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/15/2025 have been fully considered but they are not fully persuasive.
35 U.S.C 101
The prior rejection of claims 1, 3-6, and 8 as being directed to an abstract idea without significantly more are withdrawn. The independent claims are deemed to recite additional elements which, when considered with the claims as a whole and in ordered combination, integrate the claims into a practical application under Step 2A Prong 2 of the subject matter eligibility framework by making it possible to construct, on the fly, an EPT payment terminal for which the software portion that processes the payment is associated with the device for providing the product or service, and the portion that deals with reading a contact-based or contactless means of payment is associated with the communicating object.
35 U.S.C. 102
Applicant’s arguments regarding the prior rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102 have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection necessitated by amendment presented herein.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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, 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.
Claims 1, 3-6, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nuzum (US 2018/0365679 A1) in view of Hobson (US 2002/0133467 A1), further in view of Fontaine (US 2016/0132861 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Nuzum discloses a method comprising:
establishing a transaction using a communicating object in order to implement provision of a product or service to a user, the course of which the communicating object receives a request containing data relating to the transaction from a device for providing the product or service or from a transaction control module associated with said device (see Fig. 1C, external data sensor switch function 165; para. 0074) wherein the communicating object implements the following:
in response to a reader being associated with the communicating object, reading identification data of a means of access to said service, using said reader (see para. 0087, 0131-0132, wherein the reader reads payment and/or identity instrument); and
transmitting the read identification data to the transaction control module in order to validate the transaction (see para. 0083-0085); and
Nuzum does not explicitly disclose, but Hobson teaches receiving from a transaction control module or from a device, a message asking whether a reader for reading a means of access to a service implementing said transaction is associated with the communicating object (see para. 0057).
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 method of Nuzum to include the feature taught by Hobson in order to detect presence of a card reader which can facilitate the secure exchange of consumer payment information between a merchant and a host system (see Hobson, para. 0012).
Nuzum does not explicitly disclose, but Fontaine teaches prior to said reading step, establishing mutual authentication between the reader associated with the communicating object and the transaction control module (para. 0091).
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 method of Nuzum to include the feature of Fontaine in order to increase security (see Fontaine, para. 0091).
Regarding claim 3, the combination as set forth with regards to the base claim teaches at the reader associated with the communicating object, during the establishing mutual authentication:
receiving, from the transaction control module, an identifier of said transaction control module, checking the validity of said identifier (see Fontaine, para. 0078, 0089-0091, wherein the secure communication involves exchange of certificates, encryption keys, etc.),
in response to said identifier being valid, transmitting an identifier of said reader to the transaction control module (see Fontaine, para. 0078, 0089-0091, wherein the secure communication involves exchange of certificates, encryption keys, etc.),
in response to the identifier of said reader having been recognized as valid by the transaction control module, mutually authenticating (S46) the reader and the transaction control module (see Fontaine, para. 0078, 0089-0091, wherein the secure communication involves exchange of certificates, encryption keys, etc.).
Regarding claim 4, the combination as set forth with regards to the base claim teaches at the reader associated with the communicating object, during the execution of said step of establishing mutual authentication:
transmitting an identifier of said reader to the transaction control module (see Fontaine, para. 0078, 0089-0091, wherein the secure communication involves exchange of certificates, encryption keys, etc.),
in response to the identifier of said reader having been recognized as valid by the transaction control module, receiving, from said transaction control module, a message containing an identifier of said transaction control module (see Fontaine, para. 0078, 0089-0091, wherein the secure communication involves exchange of certificates, encryption keys, etc.),
checking the validity of the identifier of said transaction control module (see Fontaine, para. 0078, 0089-0091, wherein the secure communication involves exchange of certificates, encryption keys, etc.),
in response to the identifier of said transaction control module being valid, mutually authenticating the reader and the transaction control module (see Fontaine, para. 0078, 0089-0091, wherein the secure communication involves exchange of certificates, encryption keys, etc.).
Regarding claim 5, Nuzum discloses wherein an identifier of the reader as well as an identifier of the transaction control module are transmitted using an encryption mechanism (see para. 0083, 0085, 0092, wherein EMV-compliant pPOS transmits terminal identification data, wherein the disclosed merchant identification, when communicated over the encrypted/secure interfaces described, constitute transmission of a transaction control module identifier using an encryption mechanism).
Regarding claims 6 and 8, the combination as set forth with regards to claim 1 teaches the communication object and non-transitory computer-readable medium with substantially similar limitations as recited in independent claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Ballasteros (US 10,592,890 B2) discloses logic to perform a point of sale (POS) transaction as Card Present. Logic may communicate with a web site of an online vendor to process a payment to the online vendor as a certified POS device. Logic may communicate with a payment service provider associated with the online vendor to process the payment in response to communicating with the web site. Logic may interact with a card reader to obtain a packet to process the payment with a payment instrument to verify the presence of the payment instrument. Logic may encrypt communications to transmit an authorization request to the payment service provider to process the payment with encrypted communications via a secure element agent of the certified POS device, the authorization request to comprise the packet to verify that the payment instrument is present for the transaction. And logic may receive an approval of the authorization request for the payment.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 ERIC T WONG whose telephone number is (571)270-3405. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm 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, Michael W Anderson can be reached at 571-270-0508. 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.
/ERIC T WONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3693
ERIC WONG
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3693
Prosecution Insights