DETAILED ACTION
Status of Application
This action is a Final Rejection. This action is in response to the amendment and response filed on January 30, 2026.
Claims 1-14, 20, and 22-34 have been canceled.
Claims 35-48 have been added.
Claims 15 and 21 have been amended.
Claims 15-19, 21, and 35-48 are rejected.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . 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 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.
Response to Arguments
Regarding the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 101, Applicant argues the claims are eligible for reasons presented in the interview. Remarks at 12. However, agreement on this rejection was not reached during the interview. The claims are ineligible for the reasons given in the rejection below. Therefore, the rejection has been maintained.
Regarding the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103, the rejection is withdrawn in light of Applicant’s amendments and remarks. The particular combination of limitations recited in each independent claim, including, for example, the limitation of transmitting both the first token and the persistent identifier to the registered device (within the context of the full claim), makes the claims nonobvious and novel.
Claim Objections
Claims 15, 36, and 43 are objected to for the following reason: Claim 15 recites “generate, for an account, a persistent identifier, wherein the persistent identifier is a digital identifier that remains constant across multiple responses associated with an account, irrespective of variations in account tokenization by a data provider, and wherein each token is mapped to the persistent identifier and stored.” Claims 36 and 43 recite similar limitations. These limitations refer to “each token.” However, no tokens have previously been referenced. Therefore, there is a lack of antecedent basis for “each token.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 15 is objected to for the following reason: Claim 15 recites “generate a first token based on the account information, wherein the first token expires after a single use for the first event.” The portion of the limitation in bold was removed from the other independent claims and it conflicts with claim 35. It appears that Applicant likely intended to delete this portion of the limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
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 15-19, 21, and 35-48 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1: Does the Claim Fall within a Statutory Category? (see MPEP 2106.03)
Yes, with respect to claims 15-19, 21, and 35 which recite a non-transitory computer-readable medium and, therefore, are directed to the statutory class of manufacture.
Yes, with respect to claims 36-42, which recite a device comprising one or more processors and, therefore, are directed to the statutory class of machine or manufacture.
Yes, with respect to claims 43-48, which recite a method and, therefore, are directed to the statutory class of process.
Step 2A, Prong One: Is a Judicial Exception Recited? (see MPEP 2106.04(a))
The following claims (Claims 15-19, 21, and 35 are representative) identify the limitations that recite the abstract idea in regular text and that recite additional elements in bold:
15. A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing a set of instructions comprising:
one or more instructions that, when executed by one or more processors of a device, cause the device to:
generate, for an account, a persistent identifier, wherein the persistent identifier is a digital identifier that remains constant across multiple responses associated with an account, irrespective of variations in account tokenization by a data provider, and wherein each token is mapped to the persistent identifier and stored;
receive, over a network associated with financial data and from a registered device, a first authorization request for account information of the account to use for a first event;
generate a first token based on the account information, wherein the first token expires after a single use for the first event;
wherein the first token is a digital token used in one or more transactions over the network until an expiration of the first event;
transmit, as a first response of the multiple responses and in response to the first authorization request, the first token and the persistent identifier to the registered device;
receive, from the registered device, a second authorization request for the account information to use for a second event;
generate a second token based on the account information,
wherein the second token is used in one or more transactions over the network until an expiration of the second event; and
transmit, as a second response of the multiple responses and in response to the second authorization request, the second token and the persistent identifier to the registered device.
16. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 15, wherein the one or more instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the device to:
receive, from the registered device, an account request; and
transmit, to the registered device, a response to the account request indicating the account information with the persistent identifier.
17. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 15, wherein the one or more instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the device to:
transmit, to a data provider associated with the account information, an indication of the persistent identifier.
18. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 15, wherein the one or more instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the device to:
transmit an indication associated with the first token to a processing device included in the network.
19. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 15, wherein the one or more instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the device to:
receive, from a processing device included in the network, a detokenization request including the first token; and
transmit, to the processing device, the account information in response to the detokenization request.
21. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 15, wherein the one or more instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the device to:
determine a data provider of a plurality of data providers to forward the first authorization request based on a mapping of an indication included in the first authorization request to an identifier associated with the data provider; and
forward, the first authorization request to the determined data provider.
35. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 15, wherein the expiration of the first event is based on at least one of: after a single use for the first event, or an expiration of a threshold time period.
Yes. But for the recited additional elements as shown above in bold, the remaining limitations of the claims recite certain methods of organizing human activity. The claims are directed to transaction authorization. This type of method of organizing human activity is a fundamental economic practice because it involves payments and a commercial interaction such as sales activities or behaviors and business relations. Thus, the claims recite an abstract idea.
Step 2A, Prong Two: Is the Abstract Idea Integrated into a Practical Application? (see MPEP 2106.04(d))
No. The claims as a whole merely use a computer as a tool to perform the abstract idea. The computing components (i.e., additional elements that are in bold above) are recited at a high level of generality and are merely invoked as a tool to implement the steps. For example, only a programmed general purpose computing device (i.e., claimed “one or more processors of a device”) is needed to implement the claimed process. Simply implementing the abstract idea on a generic computer is not a practical application of the abstract idea. Additionally, there is no improvement to the functioning of a computer or technology. Therefore, the abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application.
Step 2B: Does the Claim Provide an Inventive Concept? (see MPEP 2106.05)
No. As discussed with respect to Step 2A, Prong 2, the additional elements in the claims, both individually and in combination, amount to no more than tools to perform the abstract idea. Merely performing the abstract idea using a computer cannot provide an inventive concept. Therefore, the claims do not provide an inventive concept.
As such, the claims are not patent eligible.
Relevant Prior Art
The following references are relevant to Applicant’s invention:
Prabhu et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2019/0034924 A1. This reference teaches a token service provider for electronic/mobile commerce transactions. See Figure 15 and associated text.
Beye, U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2019/0259026 A1. This reference teaches a request to process and event and the generation of a single-use token. See Paragraph 0030.
Email Communications
Per MPEP 502.03, Applicant may authorize email communications by filing Form PTO/SB/439, available at https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/sb0439.pdf, via the USPTO patent electronic filing system.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee 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 ELIZABETH H ROSEN whose telephone number is (571) 270-1850 and email address is elizabeth.rosen@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 10 AM ET - 7 PM ET.
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 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.
/ELIZABETH H ROSEN/Primary Examiner, 3693
Prosecution Insights