DETAILED ACTION
Acknowledgements
This office action is in response to the claims filed 04/09/2026.
Claims 1, 3-8, 10-14, and 16-20 are amended.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claims 1-20 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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/09/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Note: Applicant is limited to a single invention per Application. The independent claims recite multiple potential inventions.
Double Patenting
A terminal disclaimer was filed 12/09/25.
101
Applicant argues “a concrete improvement in NFC-based device operation by initiating an NFC data transfer only upon a physical "tapping" action by only one user device that represents hardware-constrained NFC coupling. Further, the data transfer is restricted to only the one user device, resulting in a single- use, hardware-triggered control that improves security and device behavior…. generating a unique transaction identifier, generating an address including the unique transaction identifier, transmitting information and generating and emitting a near-field wireless communication signal to one user device, when considered as a whole, amount to a meaningful use of the alleged judicial exception for securely serving electronic receipts” Examiner disagrees.
First, a tapping motion by a single device for an NFC based data transmission, is simply using NFC technology, which Applicant is claiming the use of, not the improvement of the NFC actual technology. This is not recited in the claims nor has support in the disclosure.
Secondly, Applicant has not only described a business process abstract idea, but also the automation of providing a receipt to a user, but now the receipt is sent as a message in a webpage. This is technology the Applicant is not claiming the invention of, just the use, nor do the claim limitations actually achieve Applicant’s argued improvement. It is not a technological improvement that that user is then the “only one” to receive the link. The claims recite only the one device taps for the data transmission, it does not provide technology that excludes other devices from receiving the same information, especially if they too do a “tap” action. Applicant claims use of other novel technologies in the receipt and sending of data and ultimately recite a business process, “it is important to keep in mind that an improvement in the abstract idea itself (e.g. a recited fundamental economic concept) is not an improvement in technology. For example, in Trading Technologies Int’l v. IBG, 921 F.3d 1084, 1093-94, 2019 USPQ2d 138290 (Fed. Cir. 2019), the court determined that the claimed user interface simply provided a trader with more information to facilitate market trades, which improved the business process of market trading but did not improve computers or technology.” MPEP 2106.05(a) (II). The rejection is maintained.
112
Based on Applicant’s amendments, prior 112 rejections are withdrawn.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Subject Matter Eligibility Standard
When considering subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101, it must be determined whether the claim is directed to one of the four statutory categories of invention, i.e., process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter (101 Analysis: Step 1). Even if the claim does fall within one of the statutory categories, it must then be determined whether the claim is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., law of nature, natural phenomenon, and abstract idea) (101 Analysis: Step 2a(Prong 1), and if so, Identify whether there are any additional elements recited in the claim beyond the judicial exception(s), and evaluate those additional elements to determine whether they integrate the exception into a practical application of the exception. (101 Analysis: Step 2a (Prong 2). If additional elements does not integrate the exception into a practical application of the exception, claim still requires an evaluation of whether the claim recites additional elements that amount to an inventive concept (aka “significantly more”) than the recited judicial exception. If the claim as a whole amounts to significantly more than the exception itself (there is an inventive concept in the claim), the claim is eligible. If the claim as a whole does not amount to significantly more (there is no inventive concept in the claim), the claim is ineligible. (101 Analysis: Step 2b).
The 2019 PEG explains that the abstract idea exception includes the following groupings of subject matter: a) Mathematical concepts b) Certain methods of organizing human activity and c) Mental processes
Analysis
In the instant case, claims 1, and 14 are directed to a machine, claim 7 is directed to an article of manufacture and claim 8 is directed to method.
Step 2a.1– Identifying an Abstract Idea
The claims recite the steps of “receiving transaction information… generating an address … transmitting … information … and generating and emitting, using an NFC tag controller, a near-field wireless communication signal comprising a near-field communication (NFC) data exchange format (NDEF) message ….” The recited limitations fall within the certain methods of organizing human activity grouping of abstract ideas, specifically, fundamental economic principles, for example, generating a message/receipt about a transaction that includes transaction information. Accordingly, the claims recites an abstract idea.
See MPEP 2106.
Step 2a.2 – Identifying a Practical Application
The claim does not currently recite any additional elements or combination of additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
“generating and emitting, using an NFC tag controller, a near-field wireless communication signal comprising a near-field communication (NFC) data exchange format (NDEF) message…” is not an additional element.
According to the disclosure(Pg 7, line 11-21), “The NFC tag controller 270 generates a message corresponding to an address and emits the message as a near-field wireless communication signal by controlling an NFC tag. According to an embodiment, a message may be in a particular format used for near-field wireless communication. Here, the particular format refers to a format that enables the user device 400 receiving a corresponding message to immediately perform a predetermined action. For example, the NFC tag controller 270 generates and emits an NFC Data Exchange Format (NDEF) message. An NDEF message includes information to be transmitted to the user device 400. Here, as a payload, an address is included in the NDEF message.” The limitation is directed at generating and sending a message, which is an insignificant extra-solution activity of a generic device and therefore, no an additional element.
Accordingly, even in combination, these elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components and limitations to a particular field of use or technological environment do not amount to practical applications. The claim in directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2b
The claim limitations recite “receiving transaction information… generating an address … transmitting … information … and generating and emitting, … message” are not additional elements and they amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. For the same reason these elements are not sufficient to provide an inventive concept. This is also determined to be well-understood, routine and conventional activity in the field. The Symantec, TLI, and OIP Techs, court decision cited in MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) indicates that mere receipt or transmission of data over a network is a well-understood, routine and conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner, as it is here. Therefore, when considering the additional elements alone, and in combination, there is no inventive concept in the claim and thus the claim is not eligible.
Viewed as a whole, instructions/method claims recite the concept of a fundamental economic practice in transaction receipts as performed by a generic computer. The claims do not currently recite any additional elements or combination of additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Dependent claims 2-6, 11-13, and 15-20 provide descriptive language surrounding the abstract idea. As such, these elements do not provide the significantly more to the underlying abstract idea necessary to render the invention patentable.
Dependent claim 10 discusses functions in more descriptive detail of the steps geared toward the abstract idea. As such, these elements do not provide the significantly more to the underlying abstract idea necessary to render the invention patentable.
The claims do not, for example, purport to improve the functioning of the computer itself. Nor do they effect an improvement in any other technology or technical field. Therefore, based on case law precedent, the claims are claiming subject matter similar to concepts already identified by the courts as dealing with abstract ideas. See Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd., 573 U.S. 208 (citing Bilski v. Kappos, 561, U.S. 593, 611 (2010)).
The claims at issue amount to nothing significantly more than an instruction to apply the abstract idea using some unspecified, generic computer. See Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd., 573 U.S. 208. Mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component and limitations to a particular field of use or technological environment cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application at Step 2A or provide an inventive concept in Step 2B. The use of a computer or processor to merely automate and/or implement the abstract idea cannot provide significantly more than the abstract idea itself (MPEP 2106.05(I)(A)(f) & (h)). Therefore, the claim is not patent eligible.
Conclusion
The claim as a whole, does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. This is because the claim does not affect an improvement to another technology or technical filed; the claim does not amount to an improvement to the functioning of a computer system itself; and the claim does not move beyond a general link of the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment.
Accordingly, the Examiner concludes that there are no meaningful limitations in the claim that transform the judicial exception into a patent eligible application such that the claim amounts to significantly more than the judicial exception itself.
Dependent claims do not resolve the deficiency of independent claims and accordingly stand rejected under 35 USC 101 based on the same rationale.
Dependent claims 2-6, 9-13 and 15-20 are also rejected.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 14-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 14 recites “wherein when the transaction information is completed transaction information:… the network interface is configured to transmit the completed transaction information and information regarding the web address to a server, the NFC tag controller is configured to, responsive to a tapping action by only one user device to initiate anear-field communication (NFC) data transfer, generate and emit a NFC data exchange format (NDEF) message comprising the web address as a payload to only the one user device, wherein an electronic receipt of the completed transaction information is accessible by the only one user device from the web address via the Internet without requiring input of personal information or an execution by the only one user device of an application, wherein the personal information includes an e-mail or a phone number… wherein when the transaction information is preliminary transaction information… wherein the network interface is configured to send, to the server, the completed transaction information and updated information regarding the web address, and wherein a final electronic receipt of the completed transaction information is accessible by the only one user device from the web address via the Internet without requiring the input of the personal information or the execution by the only one user device of the application.”
According to the disclosure(¶ 113-136), “ According to an embodiment, the user device 400 receives an NDEF message including the address as a payload by approaching the e-receipt generator 200 within dozens of cm…. he server 300 converts the intermediate transaction information into a preliminary e-receipt format through an application. The server 300 displays a generated preliminary e-receipt in the form of a web page linked to the address. Therefore, the user device 400 may check the preliminary e-receipt by accessing the web page linked to the address…. n operation 211, the POS terminal 100 transmits completed transaction information to the e-receipt generator 200… in operations 214 and 215, the user device 400 accesses a designated web page based on a received address and displays an updated e-receipt….” First, the disclosure does not provide for “an electronic receipt of the completed transaction information” and also “a final electronic receipt of the completed transaction information”. The disclosure does not recite, for the completed transaction information the user “responsive to a tapping action by only one user device to initiate anear-field communication (NFC) data transfer, generate and emit a NFC data exchange format (NDEF) message comprising the web address as a payload to only the one user device” The disclosure does not provide written description for the limitations “wherein when the transaction information is completed transaction information:… the network interface is configured to transmit the completed transaction information and information regarding the web address to a server, the NFC tag controller is configured to, responsive to a tapping action by only one user device to initiate anear-field communication (NFC) data transfer, generate and emit a NFC data exchange format (NDEF) message comprising the web address as a payload to only the one user device, wherein an electronic receipt of the completed transaction information is accessible by the only one user device from the web address via the Internet without requiring input of personal information or an execution by the only one user device of an application, wherein the personal information includes an e-mail or a phone number… wherein when the transaction information is preliminary transaction information… wherein the network interface is configured to send, to the server, the completed transaction information and updated information regarding the web address, and wherein a final electronic receipt of the completed transaction information is accessible by the only one user device from the web address via the Internet without requiring the input of the personal information or the execution by the only one user device of the application”. Dependent claims 15-18 are also rejected.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 4, 6, 11, and 13-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 4, 11 and 16 recite “wherein the web address links to a web page or an app page corresponding to the web address…”, and claims 1, 7, 8 and 14 recite “wherein an electronic receipt of the transaction is accessible by the only one user device from the web address via the Internet without requiring input of personal information or an execution by the only one user device of an application”. The claims are unclear and indefinite. First, it is unclear what an “app page” is, whether it is the execution of an application or a webpage to an application, which the user will have to use to view the receipt. Secondly, given that the independent claim recites not executing “by the only one user device of an application”, it is unclear the use of the webpage that then leads to an app(lication).
Claims 6, 13 and 18 recites “wherein the unique transaction identifier is generated based on at least one of the date of the transaction or the time of the transaction” and claims 1, 7, 8 and 14 recite “the transaction information including a date or a time of the transaction or information regarding the POS terminal… generate a unique transaction identifier based on the transaction information”. The claims are unclear and indefinite. The independent claims recite optional language with an option being the transaction information is “information regarding the POS terminal” to generate the unique transaction identifier. Therefore, based on the optional language of the independent claims, claims 6, 13 and 18 would be outside the scope of the independent claims, as claims 6, 13 and 18 use the optional “date” or “time”, and not the “information regarding the POS terminal” to generate the unique transaction identifier. The claims do not appear to account for the optional language of the independent claims. The claims are unclear and indefinite.
Claim 14 recites “wherein when the transaction information is completed transaction information:… the network interface is configured to transmit the completed transaction information and information regarding the web address to a server,… wherein an electronic receipt of the completed transaction information is accessible by the only one user device from the web address via the Internet without requiring input of personal information or an execution by the only one user device of an application, wherein the personal information includes an e-mail or a phone number… wherein when the transaction information is preliminary transaction information… wherein the network interface is configured to send, to the server, the completed transaction information and updated information regarding the web address, and wherein a final electronic receipt of the completed transaction information is accessible by the only one user device from the web address via the Internet without requiring the input of the personal information or the execution by the only one user device of the application.” The claims are unclear and indefinite. The claims recited generating two electronic receipts with the same “completed transaction information”. The claim is unclear and indefinite, given that the transaction information being preliminary transaction information, appears to be unnecessary as both the electronic receipt and the final receipt, based on the claims, will always result in any iteration of an “electronic receipt”, current or final, being based on “completed transaction information”. The claims are unclear and indefinite. Dependent claims 15-18 are also rejected.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 1, 7, 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Wolfond et al. (US 20140207682) (“Wolfond”).
Regarding claims 1, 7 and 8, Wolfond discloses a memory; a processor coupled to the memory; a communication interface configured to receive transaction information of a transaction from a point of sale (POS) terminal, the transaction information including a date or a time of the transaction or information regarding the POS terminal (¶ 25-27, 32, 34, 36-40; claim);
Wolfond- there is provided a transaction server for enabling a transaction between a merchant device and a customer device, the transaction server comprising: a network interface; a memory; and a processor, the processor… n response to the request, merchant device 110 or merchant terminal 115 transmits a transaction initiation request, comprising transaction information such as merchant identifier, transaction amount, transaction description, device location, and the like (¶ 25, 52)
wherein the memory stores machine-readable instructions executable by the processor to execute an address generator to generate a unique transaction identifier based on the transaction information, and generate a web address including the unique transaction identifier ; a network interface configured to communicate with a communication network and to transmit the transaction information and information regarding the web address to a server; and( ¶ 53-57, 69-75, 82-93, 147-152, 160, 161, 168-174)
Wolfond- generates a unique transaction identifier, which may also be encrypted. The transaction identifier is transmitted back to the merchant device, along with a transaction URL that can be used by a customer device to obtain further transaction details. (¶ 53)
an NFC tag controller configured to, responsive to a tapping action by only one user device to initiate a near-field communication (NFC) data transfer, generate and emit a near-field wireless communication signal comprising a NFC data exchange format (NDEF) message comprising the web address as a payload to only the one user device, ( ¶ 53-57, 69-75, 82-93, 147-152, 160, 161, 168-174)
Wolfond - In some embodiments, the customer may be presented transaction details on a display of customer device 140, for example by tapping a “Review Order” button…At 310, a customer device 140 and merchant device 110 activate a NFC exchange, for example by tapping one device to the other. Merchant device 110 transmits transaction information to customer device 140. Transaction information may comprise a transaction identifier and a transaction URL…. merchant device 110 creates a JSON object comprising the transaction identifier and transaction URL and writes it as a NFC Data Exchange Format (NDEF) record to the NFC interface (e.g., “NFC Tag”) in merchant device 110. (¶ 57, 82, 83)
wherein an electronic receipt of the transaction is accessible by the only one user device from the web address via the Internet without requiring input of personal information or an execution by the only one user device of an application, wherein the personal information includes an e-mail or a phone number. ( ¶ 53-57, 69-75, 82-93, 147-152, 160, 161, 168-174)
Wolfond- the customer complies with the prompt and the proximity communication interface of customer device 140 reads the transaction information (e.g., the transaction identifier and transaction URL) from merchant device 110. In some embodiments, to provide for customer anonymity, only the transaction identifier and, optionally, the transaction URL need be passed from the merchant device to the customer device via the NFC interface. (¶ 55)
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.
Claim(s) 2-6, and 9-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wolfond et al. (US 20140207682) (“Wolfond”), and further in view of Maenpaa (US 9892434) (“Maenpaa”).
Regarding claim 14, Wolfond discloses a memory; a processor coupled to the memory; a communication interface configured to receive transaction information of a transaction from a point of sale (POS) terminal, the transaction information including a date or a time of the transaction or information regarding the POS terminal; a network interface; and an NFC tag controller; wherein the memory stores machine-readable instructions executable by the processor to execute an address generator; wherein when the transaction information is completed transaction information: (¶ 25-27, 32, 34, 36-40; claim);
Wolfond- there is provided a transaction server for enabling a transaction between a merchant device and a customer device, the transaction server comprising: a network interface; a memory; and a processor, the processor… n response to the request, merchant device 110 or merchant terminal 115 transmits a transaction initiation request, comprising transaction information such as merchant identifier, transaction amount, transaction description, device location, and the like (¶ 25, 52)
the address generator is configured to generate a unique transaction identifier based on the transaction information, and generate a web address including the unique transaction identifier, the network interface is configured to transmit the completed transaction information and information regarding the web address to a server, ( ¶ 53-57, 69-75, 82-93, 147-152, 160, 161, 168-174)
Wolfond- generates a unique transaction identifier, which may also be encrypted. The transaction identifier is transmitted back to the merchant device, along with a transaction URL that can be used by a customer device to obtain further transaction details. (¶ 53)
the NFC tag controller is configured to, responsive to a tapping action by only one user device to initiate anear-field communication (NFC) data transfer, generate and emit a NFC data exchange format (NDEF) message comprising the web address as a payload to only the one user device, ( ¶ 53-57, 69-75, 82-93, 147-152, 160, 161, 168-174)
Wolfond - In some embodiments, the customer may be presented transaction details on a display of customer device 140, for example by tapping a “Review Order” button…At 310, a customer device 140 and merchant device 110 activate a NFC exchange, for example by tapping one device to the other. Merchant device 110 transmits transaction information to customer device 140. Transaction information may comprise a transaction identifier and a transaction URL…. merchant device 110 creates a JSON object comprising the transaction identifier and transaction URL and writes it as a NFC Data Exchange Format (NDEF) record to the NFC interface (e.g., “NFC Tag”) in merchant device 110. (¶ 57, 82, 83)
wherein an electronic receipt of the completed transaction information is accessible by the only one user device from the web address via the Internet without requiring input of personal information or an execution by the only one user device of an application, wherein the personal information includes an e-mail or a phone number; wherein when the transaction information is preliminary transaction information ( ¶ 53-57, 69-75, 82-93, 147-152, 160, 161, 168-174)
Wolfond- the customer complies with the prompt and the proximity communication interface of customer device 140 reads the transaction information (e.g., the transaction identifier and transaction URL) from merchant device 110. In some embodiments, to provide for customer anonymity, only the transaction identifier and, optionally, the transaction URL need be passed from the merchant device to the customer device via the NFC interface. (¶ 55)
the address generator is configured to execute machine-readable instructions stored in the memory to generate the unique transaction identifier from the preliminary transaction information, and generate the web address including the unique transaction identifier,the network interface is configured to transmit the preliminary transaction information and the information regarding the web address to the server, ( ¶ 53-57, 69-75, 82-93, 147-152, 160, 161, 168-174)
Wolfond- generates a unique transaction identifier, which may also be encrypted. The transaction identifier is transmitted back to the merchant device, along with a transaction URL that can be used by a customer device to obtain further transaction details. (¶ 53)
the NFC tag controller is configured to generate and emit the NDEF message comprising the web address as the payload to only the one user device such that a preliminary electronic receipt is accessible by the only one user device from the web address via the Internet ( ¶ 53-57, 69-75, 82-93, 147-152, 160, 161, 168-174)
Wolfond - In some embodiments, the customer may be presented transaction details on a display of customer device 140, for example by tapping a “Review Order” button…At 310, a customer device 140 and merchant device 110 activate a NFC exchange, for example by tapping one device to the other. Merchant device 110 transmits transaction information to customer device 140. Transaction information may comprise a transaction identifier and a transaction URL…. merchant device 110 creates a JSON object comprising the transaction identifier and transaction URL and writes it as a NFC Data Exchange Format (NDEF) record to the NFC interface (e.g., “NFC Tag”) in merchant device 110. (¶ 57, 82, 83)
the address generator is configured to, after a final transaction is completed, update the preliminary transaction information and the web address with the completed transaction information, wherein the network interface is configured to send, to the server, the completed transaction information and updated information regarding the web address, and (Figure 6A-6F; ¶ 53-57, 69-75, 82-93, 107, 147-174)
Wolfond - At 1015, second device 140′ transmits an HTTP GET request to transaction server 120′. The HTTP POST request may be directed to the transaction URL received from first device 110′, and may comprise information such as the unique identifier associated with second device 140′ (e.g., obtained during registration) and the transaction identifier received from first device 110′. In some embodiments, the HTTP GET request sent to transaction server 120′ may be sent as a JSON object… Upon completing the verification transaction, transaction server 120′ generates a message for first device 110′ containing the outcome of the verification transaction and transmits the message to push provider 180 at 1035. In response, push provider 180′ generates a push notification comprising the outcome of the transaction and transmits the outcome message to first device 110′ at 1040… It will be appreciated that data communications between transaction server 120 and merchant device 110, customer device 140 and push provider 180 are preferably encrypted using, for example, the HTTPS protocol. (¶ 107, 152, 155)
wherein a final electronic receipt of the completed transaction information is accessible by the only one user device via the Internet without requiring the input of the personal information or the execution by the only one user device of the application. (62, 63, 99, 103-107)
Wolfond- If the payment was successful, in response to the transaction authorization, transaction server 120 directly or indirectly sends notifications (e.g., e-mail, push notifications, etc.) to both customer device 140 and merchant device 110, at 250, to complete the transaction. …The customer can be notified of the payment amount, the transaction description, whether or not the payment was accepted or rejected, and in the case where the transaction is accepted, a copy of the transaction record in the form of a digital receipt… It will be appreciated that data communications between transaction server 120 and merchant device 110, customer device 140 and push provider 180 are preferably encrypted using, for example, the HTTPS protocol. (¶ 62, 63, 107)
Wolfond does not disclose wherein a final electronic receipt of the completed transaction information is accessible by the only one user device from the web address.
Maenpaa teaches wherein a final electronic receipt of the completed transaction information is accessible by the only one user device from the web address (Abstract; column 5, line 1-40; claim 1)
Maenpaa - wherein the user device and merchant POS terminal comprise circuitry to effect communication between the merchant POS terminal and the user device by at least one method selected from the group consisting of: near field communication (NFC), a communicated quick response (QR) code, and Bluetooth communication;… granting the customer using the user device access to the digital receipt in the digital receipt repository via the URL(claim 1)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Wolfond(¶ 2) which teaches “use of a proximity communication interface of a customer mobile device and a merchant mobile device to perform payment transactions in a secure manner” and Maenpaa (¶ 4) which teaches “at merchant locations equipped with near field communication (NFC) terminals, checkout can be done simply and easily” in order to generate digital receipts to facilitate transactions (Maenpaa; column 1, line 8-34, column 2, line 6-25).
Regarding claims 2, 9 and 15, Wolfond discloses wherein the unique transaction identifier is generated by using a hash function on the transaction information (¶ 20, 68-77, 87).
Regarding claims 3 and 10, Maenpaa teaches wherein the transaction information is preliminary transaction information; wherein the address generator is configured to, after a final transaction is completed, update the preliminary transaction information and the web address with completed transaction information; wherein the network interface is configured to send, to the server, the completed transaction information and updated information regarding the web address; and wherein a final electronic receipt is accessible by the only one user device from the web address via the Internet (Abstract; column 4, line 36-63, column 5, line 1-40; claim 1).
Regarding claims 4, 11 and 16, Wolfond discloses wherein the web address links to a web page or an app page corresponding to the web address which is only accessible by the only one user device for accessing the electronic receipt of the transaction ( ¶ 53-57, 69-75, 82-93, 147-152, 160, 161, 168-174).
Regarding claims 5, 12 and 17, Wolfond discloses wherein the web address links to a server address of the server which is only accessible by the only one user device for accessing the electronic receipt of the transaction ( ¶ 53-57, 69-75, 82-93, 147-152, 160, 161, 168-174).
Regarding claims 6, 13 and 18, Maenpaa teaches wherein the unique transaction identifier is generated based on at least one of the date of the transaction or the time of the transaction (Figure 3; column 7, line 18-65).
Regarding claim 19, Maenpaa teaches wherein the web address is a Uniform Resource Locator (URL) or an address having a format "web address/identifier" (Abstract; column 3, line 30-67, column 4, line 1-63, column 5, line 1-67, column 6, line 1-33).
Regarding claim 20, Maenpaa teaches wherein the electronic receipt of the transaction is accessible by the only one user device from the web address via the Internet without requiring a user login, and wherein the server is configured such that upon access by the only one user device, the web address becomes non-functional for any subsequent access attempts by other user devices (Abstract; column 4, line 36-63, column 5, line 1-40, column 6, line 1-33; claim 1).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Patel et al. (US 2015/0025986) teaches electronic receipt generation.
Belanger et al (US 11,157,954) teaches NFC communication and NFC data exchange format(NDEF)
EPO(8/29/25) unentered IDS applications – US 20130112743 – potential 102
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ILSE I IMMANUEL whose telephone number is (469)295-9094. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 am to 5:00pm.
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 H PATEL can be reached on (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.
/ILSE I IMMANUEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3699
Prosecution Insights