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 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 1-8 and 17-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., an abstract idea) without “significantly more.” Claims 1-8 and 17-28 are directed to detecting data, determine web address based on data, retrieve checkout data based on web address, determine accessibility option associated with output of the checkout data, and output the checkout data based on accessibility option which is considered an abstract idea. Further, the claim(s) as a whole, when examined on a limitation-by-limitation basis and in ordered combination do not include an inventive concept.
Step 1 – Statutory Categories
As indicated in the preamble of the claims, the examiner finds the claims are directed to a process, machine, or article of manufacture.
Step 2A – Prong One - Abstract Idea Analysis
Exemplary claim 21 (and similarly claims 1 and 17) recites the following abstract concepts, in italics below, which are found to include an “abstract idea”:
A method comprising:
detecting broadcasted data transmitted by a merchant device to a user device system over short-range wireless communications;
determining a web address based on the broadcasted data;
retrieving checkout data for a transaction being processed at the merchant device based
on the web address;
determining, based on an accessibility preference of a user utilizing the user device system, an accessibility option associated with an output of the checkout data in an application
via an output component of the user device system, wherein the accessibility option aids the user with consuming the checkout data while utilizing the user device system; and
outputting the checkout data based on the accessibility option via the application.
The claim features in italics above as drafted, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, are mental processes and/or certain methods of organizing human activity performed by generic computer components. That is, other than reciting “broadcasted data”, “a merchant device”, “a user device system” and “short-range wireless communication”, nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind or a method of organized human activity. For example, but for the “broadcasted data”, “merchant device”, “user device system” and “short-range wireless communication” language, “detecting… data.. over… communications… determining a web address based on the … data… determining, based on an accessibility preference of a user …, an accessibility option associated with an output of the checkout data in an application via an output component …, wherein the accessibility option aids the user with consuming the checkout data ” in the context of this claim encompass mental processes. If the claim limitations, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers steps which could be performed in the human mind including an observation, evaluation, judgement of opinion but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “mental process” grouping of abstract ideas. Further, “retrieving checkout data for a transaction being processed … based on the web address… outputting the checkout data based on the accessibility option via the application” in the context of this claim encompass certain methods of organizing human activity. If the claim limitations, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers fundamental economic practice, commercial or legal interaction or managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Step 2A – Prong Two - Abstract Idea Analysis
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claims only recite four additional elements – “broadcasted data”, “a merchant device”, “a user device system” and “short-range wireless communication”. The “broadcasted data”, “merchant device”, “user device system” and “short-range wireless communication” are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing generic computer functions) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (MPEP 2106.05(f), i.e. the detecting, determining and outputting steps) and data gathering, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g), i.e. the retrieving step). Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B - Significantly More Analysis
The claim does 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 elements of “broadcasted data”, “a merchant device”, “a user device system” and “short-range wireless communication” amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component and insignificant extra-solution activity. Mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component and insignificant extra-solution activity cannot provide an inventive concept. Further, the background does not provide any indication that the “broadcasted data”, “merchant device”, “user device system” and “short-range wireless communication” are anything other than a generic, off-the-shelf computer components. For these reasons, there is no inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible.
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.
Claims 1, 2-3, 5-17, 19-21, 23 and 25-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over United States Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0303938 A1 to Sanchez-Llorens et al. (“Sanchez”) in view of United States Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0193490 A1 to Mercille (“Mercille”).
As per claims 1, 17 and 21, the claimed subject matter that is met by Sanchez includes:
A user device system comprising (Sanchez: Fig. 1, 104A and Fig. 41):
a non-transitory memory (Sanchez: ¶ 0336 and 0373); and
one or more hardware processors coupled to the non-transitory memory and configured to execute instructions to cause the user device system to (Sanchez: Fig. 41, 4102):
detect data transmitted by a merchant device over short-range wireless communications (Sanchez: ¶¶ 0232-0234 “the device can send an address (e.g., URL, etc.) to the personal device. The address can be associated with a remote location from which the functionality is accessible (e.g., the payment processing service server(s) 124). In some examples, the address can be sent via NFC or another short-range network of the network(s) 128. The user of the personal device can interact with the address (e.g., via a selectable control presented via a UI of the personal device) and send a request to the remote location for access to the functionality”);
determine a web address based on the data (Sanchez: ¶ 0234);
retrieve checkout data for a transaction being processed at the merchant device based on the web address (Sanchez: ¶¶ 0213 and 0232-0234);
determine, based on an accessibility preference of a user utilizing the user device system, an accessibility option associated with an output of the checkout data in an application via an output component of the user device system, wherein the accessibility option aids the user with consuming the checkout data while utilizing the user device system (Sanchez: ¶¶ 0086, 0141-0143, 0213 and 0232-0234); and
output the checkout data based on the accessibility option via the application (Sanchez: ¶¶ 0086, 0141-0143, 0213 and 0232-0234).
Sanchez fails to specifically teach broadcasted data. The Examiner provides Mercille to teach and disclose this claimed feature.
The claimed subject matter that is met by Mercille includes:
detect broadcasted data over short-range wireless communications (Mercille: ¶¶ 0024-0025 and 0027)
determine a web address based on the broadcasted data (Mercille: ¶¶ 0024-0025 and 0027).
Sanchez teaches a system and method for transaction processing. Mercille teaches a comparable system and method for transaction processing that was improved in the same way as the claimed invention. Mercille offers the embodiment of broadcasted data. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized the adaptation of the broadcasted data as disclosed by Mercille to the system and method for transaction processing as taught by Sanchez for the predicted result of improved systems and methods for transaction processing. No additional findings are seen to be necessary.
As per claim 3 and 23, the claimed subject matter that is met by Sanchez and Mercille includes:
wherein the web address enables the application to be directed to a webpage having the checkout data hosted by a transaction processor for the transaction on behalf of the merchant device, and wherein the webpage is output via the application based on the accessibility option (Sanchez: ¶¶ 0141-0144).
The motivation for combining the teachings of Sanchez and Mercille are discussed in the rejection of claims 1 and 21, and are incorporated herein.
As per claims 5 and 25, the claimed subject matter that is met by Sanchez and Mercille includes:
wherein the broadcasted data comprises an electronic message transmitted using a near field communication (NFC) standard that provides the web address with an executable command without a message file attachment, and wherein retrieving the checkout data comprises:
executing the executable command; and
fetching the checkout data from a webpage corresponding to the web address based on
the executing (Sanchez: ¶ 0234 and Mercille: ¶ 0024)).
The motivation for combining the teachings of Sanchez and Mercille are discussed in the rejection of claims 1 and 21, and are incorporated herein.
As per claims 6, 19 and 26, the claimed subject matter that is met by Sanchez and Mercille includes:
wherein the accessibility option provides an assistance to the user when reviewing the checkout data for the transaction, and wherein the assistance is associated with one of a visual appearance of the checkout data, a text-to-speech output of audio data associated with the checkout data, a voice input or a text input by the user performed in association with the checkout data that is converted to the text-to-speech output, or a payment option preselected by the user on the user device system for the transaction (Sanchez: ¶ 0141).
The motivation for combining the teachings of Sanchez and Mercille are discussed in the rejection of claims 1, 17 and 21, and are incorporated herein.
As per claims 7, 20 and 27, the claimed subject matter that is met by Sanchez and Mercille includes:
determine that the accessibility option is enabled for the output of the checkout data;
receive one or more updates to the checkout data while the transaction is being processed at the merchant device; and
update the output of the checkout data in real-time based on the one or more updates and the accessibility option (Sanchez: ¶ 0213).
The motivation for combining the teachings of Sanchez and Mercille are discussed in the rejection of claims 1, 17 and 21, and are incorporated herein.
As per claims 8 and 28, the claimed subject matter that is met by Sanchez and Mercille includes:
determine, based on the accessibility option, to process a payment for the transaction at the user device system instead of the merchant device; and
process the payment at the user device system (Sanchez: ¶¶ 0069 and 0214).
The motivation for combining the teachings of Sanchez and Mercille are discussed in the rejection of claims 1 and 21, and are incorporated herein.
Claims 2, 18 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sanchez in view of Mercille as applied in claims 1, 17 and 21, and further in view of United States Patent No. 8,768,765 B1 to Kato et al. (“Kato”).
As per claims 2, 18 and 22, the claimed subject matter that is met by Sanchez and Mercille includes:
wherein the web address comprises one of a network file path or a uniform resource locator (URL) (Sanchez: ¶¶ 0233-0234).
Sanchez and Mercille fail to specifically teach wherein the broadcasted data comprises a digital near field communications (NFC) token. The Examiner provides Kato to teach and disclose this claimed feature.
The claimed subject matter that is met by Kato includes:
wherein the broadcasted data comprises a digital near field communications (NFC) token, and wherein the web address comprises one of a network file path or a uniform resource locator (URL) (Kato: column 11, lines 34-50).
Sanchez and Mercille teaches near field communication systems. Kato teaches a comparable near field communication system that was improved in the same way as the claimed invention. Kato offers the embodiment of wherein the broadcasted data comprises a digital near field communications (NFC) token. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized the adaptation of the token as disclosed by Kato to the near field communication systems as taught by Sanchez and Mercille for the predicted result of improved near field communication systems. No additional findings are seen to be necessary.
Claims 4 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sanchez in view of Mercille as applied in claims 1 and 21, and further in view of International Publication No. WO 2013/040684 A1 to Wolfond et al. (“Wolfond”).
As per claims 4 and 24, Sanchez and Mercille fail to specifically teach determine, prior to determining the web address, that the broadcasted data detected over the short-range wireless communications cannot be used to determine the web address; capture a quick response (QR) code that includes encoded data for the broadcasted data; and decode the broadcasted data from the encoded data of the QR code. The Examiner provides Wolfond to teach and disclose this claimed feature.
The claimed subject matter that is met by Wolfond includes:
determine, prior to determining the web address, that the broadcasted data detected over the short-range wireless communications cannot be used to determine the web address;
capture a quick response (QR) code that includes encoded data for the broadcasted data; and
decode the broadcasted data from the encoded data of the QR code (Wolfond: ¶ 0115).
Sanchez and Mercille teaches systems and methods for transaction processing. Wolfond teaches a comparable system and method for transaction processing that was improved in the same way as the claimed invention. Wolfond offers the embodiment of determine, prior to determining the web address, that the broadcasted data detected over the short-range wireless communications cannot be used to determine the web address; capture a quick response (QR) code that includes encoded data for the broadcasted data; and decode the broadcasted data from the encoded data of the QR code. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized the adaptation of the QR code as disclosed by Wolfond to the systems and methods for transaction processing as taught by Sanchez and Mercille for the predicted result of improved systems and methods for transaction processing. No additional findings are seen to be necessary.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Hunter Wilder whose telephone number is (571)270-7948. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30AM-5:30PM.
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.
/A. Hunter Wilder/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627