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 .
The following is a Final Office Action in response to communications received on 2/25/2026. Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been examined. Claims 1, 10, and 15-16 have been amended.
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.
Step 1: The claims 1-14 are a system and claims 15-20 are a computer readable medium. Thus, each independent claim, on its face, is directed to one of the statutory categories of 35 U.S.C. §101. However, the claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 2A Prong 1: The independent claims (1, 10 and 15) recite:
Claim 1: A computing system, comprising:
a database retrievably storing information associated with a user including information relating to an account associated with the user and information received from a first third-party computing system including first information; and
a processing circuit coupling to the database and to a user device associated with the account, wherein the user device comprises a data storage, and the processing circuit is structured to:
receive, from the first third-party computing system, second information;
update the information associated with the user stored in the database to include the second information;
determine, based on the information relating to the account associated with the user to transmit the first information to the data storage of the user device and to refrain from transmitting the second information;
transmit the first information to the user device for storage in the data storage of the user device;
in response to receiving a request for a transaction from a second third- party computing system that excludes the second information, determine that the request is associated with the second information stored in the database; and
transmit the second information stored in the database to the data storage of the user device prior to completion of the transaction.
Claim 10: A computing system, comprising:
a processing circuit operatively coupled to a database and a user device associated with the user, wherein the processing circuit is structured to:
receive, from a first third-party computing system, first information and second information;
store the first information and the second information in the database, wherein the information associated with the user includes the stored first information and the stored second information;
determine, based on the information relating to an account associated with the user, to include one of the first information or the second information in an update for storage in a data storage of the user device and refrain from including the other one of the first information or the second information in the update;
transmit the update to the user device for storage in the data storage of the user device;
in response to receiving a request for a transaction from a second third- party computing system that excludes the other of the first information or the second information, determine that the request is associated with the other of the first information or the second information stored in the database; and
transmit the other of the first information or the second information stored in the database to the data storage of the user device prior to completion of the transaction.
Claim 15 recites substantially parallel limitations to claims 1 and 10 and is interpreted and analyzed as such.
These limitations, except for the italicized portions, under their broadest reasonable interpretations, recite certain methods of organizing human activity for managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions) as well as commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations). The claimed invention recites steps for processing information as it relates to transactions and consumers connected to those transactions via their user accounts (see [0003 of the specification). The steps under its broadest reasonable interpretation specifically fall under sales activities. The Examiner notes that although the claim limitations are summarized, the analysis regarding subject matter eligibility considers the entirety of the claim and all of the claim elements individually, as a whole, and in ordered combination.
Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claims recite the additional elements of:
Claim 1: A computing system, comprising:
a database
from a first third-party computing system
a processing circuit coupling to the database and to a user device associated with the account, wherein the user device comprises a data storage, and the processing circuit is structured to:
from the first third-party computing system
to the data storage of the user device
to the user device for storage in the data storage of the user device; and
from a second third-party computing system,
to the user device for storage in the data storage of the user device,
Claim 10: A computing system, comprising:
a processing circuit operatively coupled to a database and a user device associated with the user, wherein the processing circuit is structured to:
from a first third-party computing system,
in the database
for storage in a data storage of the user device
to the user device for storage in the data storage of the user device; and
from a second third-party computing system
to the user device for storage in the data storage of the user device
Claim 15: A non-transitory computer-readable media with computer-executable instructions embodied thereon, wherein the computer-executable instructions, when executed by one or more processors of a computing system, cause the computing system to perform operations, comprising:
from a first third-party computing system
from the first third-party computing system
to a data storage of a user device
to the user device for storage in the data storage of the user device; and
from a second third-party computing system,
to the user device for storage in the data storage of the user device
The additional elements of emphasized above are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function of processing data) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. The limitations do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and therefore do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application – MPEP 2106.05(f).
Accordingly, these additional elements when considered individually or as a whole do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The independent claims are directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B: The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed with respect to Step 2A Prong two, the additional elements in the claims amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exception using a generic computer component.
Even when considered as an ordered combination, the additional elements of claim 1, 10, and 15 do not add anything that is not already present when they are considered individually. Therefore, under Step 2B, there are no meaningful limitations in claims 1, 10, and 15 that transform the judicial exception into a patent eligible application such that the claims amount to significantly more than the judicial exception itself (see MPEP 2106.05).
As such, independent claims 1, 10, and 15 are ineligible.
Dependent claims 2-9, 11-14, and 16-20 when analyzed as a whole, are held to be patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. §101 because the additional recited limitations fail to establish that the claims are not directed to the same abstract idea of Independent Claims 1, 10 and 15 without significantly more.
Claim 2 recites wherein the processing circuit is further structured to organize the first information and the second information in the database according to a ranking. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 3 recites wherein the processing circuit is further structured to (1) identify an entity based on the request and (2) identify the second information as being associated with the entity. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 4 recites wherein the processing circuit is further structured to cooperate with a circuit of the user device to establish a mobile account on the user device and to provide the information associated with the user to the mobile account. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 5 recites wherein the processing circuit is further structured to cooperate with a circuit of the user device to provide an interface to the user device, the interface configured to present, via a display device of the user device, at least some of the information associated with the user. The limitation recites the additional elements of a display device of the user device, however is recited at high level of generality merely applying the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 6 recites wherein the processing circuit is further structured to cooperate with the circuit of the user device to receive an input regarding a user selection of the first information or the second information, the processing circuit structured to provide the first information or the second information to the data storage of the user device responsive to the input. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 7 recites wherein the processing circuit is further structured to cooperate with the circuit of the user device to provide, to the user via the user device, an alert relating to the information associated with the user. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 8 recites wherein the alert includes an indication of an upcoming change to the information received from the first third-party computing system. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 9 recites wherein the processing circuit is further structured to receive the request from the second third-party computing system using the user device, wherein the request does not reflect the information associated with the user. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 11 recites wherein the processing circuit is further structured to cooperate with a circuit of user device to establish a mobile account on the user device and to provide the information associated with the user to the mobile account. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 12 recites wherein the processing circuit is further structured to cooperate with a circuit to provide an interface to the user device, the interface configured to present, via a display device of the user device, at least some of the information associated with the user. The limitation recites the additional elements of a display device of the user device, however is recited at high level of generality merely applying the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 13 recites wherein the processing circuit is further structured to cooperate with the circuit to receive an input that includes a user selection of the first information or the second information, the processing circuit structured to provide the first information or the second information to the data storage of the user device responsive to the input. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 14 recites wherein the update includes a deletion of third information from the data storage of the user device, wherein the processing circuit is further structured to cause the deletion of the third information from the data storage of the user device. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 16 recites the further comprising: organizing the first information and the second information in a database according to a ranking. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 17 recites the operations further comprising: identifying an entity based on the request; and identifying the second information as being associated with the entity. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 18 recites the operations further comprising: providing an interface to the user device, the interface configured to present, via a display device of the user device, at least some of the information associated with the user. The limitation recites the additional elements of a display device of the user device, however is recited at high level of generality merely applying the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 19 recites the operations further comprising: providing, to the user via the user device, an alert relating to the information associated with the user. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 20 recites wherein the alert includes an indication of an upcoming change to the information received from the first third-party computing system. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
For these reasons claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 USC 101.
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.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okerlund (US 2014/0279420) in view of Weiner (US 20140114846).
Regarding claim 1, 10, and 15 Okerlund discloses:
A computing system, comprising: (claim 1)
A computing system, comprising: a processing circuit operatively coupled to a database (a database query) and a user device associated with the user, (smart device offers may be downloaded to in Figure 8B and [0014], wherein the processing circuit is structured to: [0091, Figure 33, 34 [0120] In another embodiment, incentive offers are sent to a program registrant based on information shared dynamically through an electronic device. [0121] In accordance with one embodiment of the system and method, a database query is run to identify incentive offers which correspond to the dynamically-provided location information and/or other parameters set by either or both the merchant and program registrant.] (claim 10)
A non-transitory computer-readable media with computer-executable instructions embodied thereon, wherein the computer-executable instructions, when executed by one or more processors of a computing system, cause the computing system to perform operations, comprising: [0182] Certain embodiments are described herein as including logic or a number of components, modules, elements, units, and/or mechanisms. These structures may constitute either software modules (e.g. code embodied (1) on a non-transitory machine-readable medium or (2) in a transmission signal) or hardware-implemented modules. In example embodiments, one or more computer systems (e.g. a standalone, client or server computer system) or one or more processors may be configured by software (e.g., an application or application portion) as hardware that operates to perform certain operations as described herein. (claim 15)
a database retrievably storing information associated with a user including information relating to an account associated with the user and information received from a first third-party computing system including first information; and (Figure 16 of database containing participant ID and incentive offer data) [0278] In the embodiment illustrated in FIG. 15, the incentive program manager 15C also maintains a variety of methods for merchants to communicate with the IPM 15A. This enables the IPM to receive information from merchants about the types of incentive offers they wish to send out and the characteristics of those customers, and also to provide consulting and other analytics services to merchants by utilizing the links between 15B and 15A. Taking into account the desired incentive offers received from merchants, and utilizing the data available through the data available in 15B, the IPM can communicate or deliver incentive offers to optimized program registrants represented by 15D in this particular embodiment. [0279] FIG. 16 is a visual depiction of exemplar data which can be stored in a database and associated with one or more unique program registrants. Specifically, 16C2 is, in this embodiment, an IPM containing numerous program registrant records. One such record is called out in the bottom right-hand of 16C2. As depicted by FIGS. 16B1 through 16B7, a wide variety of information may be associated with a particular record.
a processing circuit coupling to the database and to a user device associated with the account, wherein the user device comprises a data storage (smart device offers may be downloaded to in Figure 8B and [0014], and the processing circuit is structured to: [0091, Figure 33, 34 [0120] In another embodiment, incentive offers are sent to a program registrant based on information shared dynamically through an electronic device. [0121] In accordance with one embodiment of the system and method, a database query is run to identify incentive offers which correspond to the dynamically-provided location information and/or other parameters set by either or both the merchant and program registrant.]
receive, from the first third-party computing system (A merchant of the IPM), second information; (shown in Figure 8B a plurality of incentives triggered for multiple different merchants based on location); update the information associated with the user to include the second information;[0225] In another embodiment, GPS systems associated with a program registrant can be utilized to generate or trigger incentives if the data is transmitted (even transmitted periodically) or otherwise accessible by the IPM. A GPS located in a vehicle, for example, may be utilized in certain embodiments. Where a phone is not equipped with GPS technology, or said GPS data is not transmittable, location data may still be obtainable. For example, cell phones utilizing radio frequencies that are picked up and transmitted from cell phone towers. In general, cell phone towers that are physically closest to a cell phone are utilized. As will be recognized by one of skill in the art, even where an individual is not actively talking on their phone, data from that phone is transmitted to and from that cell phone such that a cell phone network "knows" where (roughly) a customer is, and is thus able to transmit incoming calls to that customer wherever they are. That data in aggregate form may be utilized to show travel patterns for any one consumer, and said data may, in certain embodiments, be utilized by the IPM 71 or other entity, and/or stored in a database 74. Said data 74 is especially powerful for identifying appropriate incentive offers for delivery to program registrants traveling for business or pleasure outside of their home territory.
determine, based on the information relating to the account associated with the user ([0100] a database of historical spending data and constructs a profile), to transmit the first information to the data storage of the user device and to refrain from transmitting the second information; [0266] Once the incentive offer is created, it is then communicated to the program registrants 141, who have either enrolled one or more preexisting electronic payment instruments in the incentive program 14G or have been issued a new eligible EPI 14H. The incentive offer is communicated to the program registrant through any communication method known to those of skill in the art 14E. In this embodiment, the program registrant has implemented an incentive offer filter, to limit the delivery of incentive offers to those offers which exceed some threshold or which meet certain criteria 14F (e.g., for certain classes of merchants (restaurants but not massage parlors); merchants having met a threshold of acceptability (a "star" rating or minimal Yelp.com rating, for example); or merchants in a certain geographic area, etc.). And see [0198], [0155] and see example of transmitting targeted incentive only on certain days with higher likelihood of redemption [0074], [0100], [0101]
transmit the first information to the user device for storage in the data storage of the user device; and [0243]The offers are deployed and downloaded or otherwise transmitted to smart devices (via software applications on Android or iPhone or Blackberry devices, for example), but, in some embodiments, remain latent in the device and are not immediately displayed to the recipient.
While Okerlund discloses the limiting of the offers/incentives sent to a user’s device to be downloaded the offers coming from a plurality of merchants participating in an incentive system, the reference does not expressly disclose:
in response to receiving a request for a transaction from a second third- party computing system that excludes the second information, determine that the request is associated with the second information stored in the database; and
transmit the second information stored in the database to the data storage of the user device prior to completion of the transaction,
However Weiner teaches:
in response to receiving a request for a transaction from a second third- party computing system (merchant/acquirer domain 100 in Figure 9) that excludes the second information, determine that the request is associated with the second information stored in the database; and [0074] In stage 1030, the obtained MID of stage 1020 associated with MD 260 is transmitted to the various databases 231-236, to determine if any promotions, loyalty benefits, pre-purchase coupons, or gift certificates, without limitation, for the associated obtained MID of stage 1020 are relevant to MD 260. Similarly, information regarding payment options for the identified access point 160 is determined, and the relevance to the customer's wallet is retrieved from customer wallet functionality 231. For example, only certain payment options may be accepted by identified access point 160, and a nexus of accepted payment options and available payment options from customer wallet functionality 231 is determined. Any relevant coupons retrieved from customer wallet functionality 231 and/or coupons platform 235 may be optionally validated by the issuer, if required. Check Out Wallet (CHOW) information is generated by TS 210 and transmitted to MD 260, the CHOW information being advantageously defined in relation to the obtained MID and is thus location relevant, exhibiting only offers, discounts or payment options relevant to the merchant which has been associated with MD 260 as described in stage 1020. The examiner interprets the second information as being exclude as the reference requires the functionality to determine available promotions for the corresponding merchant (second third- party system)
transmit the second information stored in the database to the data storage of the user device prior to completion of the transaction. [0114] In stage 4060, TS 210 retrieves from customer wallet functionality 231 information relevant to the merchant of access point 160 in relation to MD 260 such as payment means available to MD 260 which are accepted by access point 160. TS 210 transmits the merchant information to the various databases 232-236 to determine if any promotions, loyalty benefits, pre-purchase coupons, or gift certificates, without limitation, are relevant to the current MD 260 condition, i.e. preparation to engage in commerce with access point 160, and validate current information stored in the customer wallet. Any relevant coupons retrieved from customer wallet functionality 231 and/or coupons platform 235 may be optionally validated by the issuer. CHOW information is generated by TS 210 and transmitted to MD 260, the CHOW information being advantageously defined in relation to the defined access point 160 of stage 4030 and is thus relevant, exhibiting only offers, discounts or payment options relevant to the current merchant MD 260 is associated with. Additionally, a One Time Transaction Number (OTTN) is transmitted to MD 260, the OTTN generated uniquely for the present transaction.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify to the sending of the incentive in Okerlund to include the limitations above, as taught in Weiner, in order to improve the security and flexibility of transactions ([0016]).
Regarding claims 3 and 17, Okerlund in view of Weiner teaches the limitations set forth above. While Okerlund discloses the limiting of the offers/incentives sent to a user’s device to be downloaded the offers coming from a plurality of merchants participating in an incentive system, the reference does not expressly disclose:
wherein the processing circuit is further structured to (1) identify an entity based on the request and (2) identify the second information as being associated with the entity.
However Weiner teaches:
wherein the processing circuit is further structured to (1) identify an entity based on the request and (2) identify the second information as being associated with the entity. [0074] In stage 1030, the obtained MID of stage 1020 associated with MD 260 is transmitted to the various databases 231-236, to determine if any promotions, loyalty benefits, pre-purchase coupons, or gift certificates, without limitation, for the associated obtained MID of stage 1020 are relevant to MD 260. Similarly, information regarding payment options for the identified access point 160 is determined, and the relevance to the customer's wallet is retrieved from customer wallet functionality 231. For example, only certain payment options may be accepted by identified access point 160, and a nexus of accepted payment options and available payment options from customer wallet functionality 231 is determined. Any relevant coupons retrieved from customer wallet functionality 231 and/or coupons platform 235 may be optionally validated by the issuer, if required. Check Out Wallet (CHOW) information is generated by TS 210 and transmitted to MD 260, the CHOW information being advantageously defined in relation to the obtained MID and is thus location relevant, exhibiting only offers, discounts or payment options relevant to the merchant which has been associated with MD 260 as described in stage 1020.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify to the sending of the incentive in Okerlund to include wherein the processing circuit is further structured to (1) identify an entity based on the request and (2) identify the second information as being associated with the entity, as taught in Weiner, in order to in order to improve the security and flexibility of transactions ([0016]).
Regarding claims 4 and 11, Okerlund in view of Weiner teaches the limitations set forth above. Okerlund further discloses:
wherein the processing circuit is further structured to cooperate with a circuit of the user device to establish a mobile account on the user device and to provide the information associated with the user to the mobile account. [0338] FIG. 26 represents one embodiment of a GUI for program registrants to manage aspects of their interaction with IPM. In this embodiment, the user logs onto their account which is accessible via a secure server 26A2 the information on which is maintained and protected using, in one embodiment, 256-bit SSL EV encryption. Once logged into their account, the program registrant may access the incentives delivered to them 26A1.
Regarding claims 5, 12, and 18, Okerlund in view of Weiner teaches the limitations set forth above. Okerlund further discloses:
wherein the processing circuit is further structured to cooperate with a circuit of the user device to provide an interface to the user device, the interface configured to present, via a display device of the user device, at least some of the information associated with the user. [0338] FIG. 26 represents one embodiment of a GUI for program registrants to manage aspects of their interaction with IPM. In this embodiment, the user logs onto their account which is accessible via a secure server 26A2 the information on which is maintained and protected using, in one embodiment, 256-bit SSL EV encryption. Once logged into their account, the program registrant may access the incentives delivered to them 26A1.
Regarding claims 6 and 13, Okerlund in view of Weiner teaches the limitations set forth above. Okerlund further discloses:
wherein the processing circuit is further structured to cooperate with the circuit of the user device to receive an input regarding a user selection of the first information or the second information, the processing circuit structured to provide the first information or the second information to the data storage of the user device responsive to the input. [0338-40] The program registrant may also utilize the GUI to link external data sources to the IPM 26A4, including social websites storing information about the program registrant, including "likes" and "dislikes," in order to add additional personal data to the system thereby enabling it to function with even greater accuracy. Similarly, portal 26A5 permits a program registrant to record their likes and dislikes (e.g., "I like Italian food)", wherein the data provided by the program registrant via the graphical user interface is automatically entered into a database (see, e.g., 28A) which may be queried by merchants, including merchants operating Italian restaurants, that wish to use the system and method to identify and deliver incentives only to those individuals with a demonstrated affection for Italian food.
Regarding claims 7 and 19, Okerlund in view of Weiner teaches the limitations set forth above. Okerlund further discloses:
wherein the processing circuit is further structured to cooperate with the circuit of the user device to provide, to the user via the user device, an alert relating to the information associated with the user. [0091] "push alerts" for communicating offers and notifications in [0212]
Regarding claims 8 and 20, Okerlund in view of Weiner teaches the limitations set forth above. Okerlund further discloses:
wherein the alert includes an indication of an upcoming change to the information received from the first third-party computing system. [0316] The status of the reward is also provided to the program registrant in FIG. 23, and is designated as either "Delivered," meaning that the reward has been delivered to the program registrant as by, for example, depositing the reward into a checking or other bank account, or as "Pending" meaning that the deposit has not yet occurred, but is expected 23G.
Regarding claim 14, Okerlund in view of Weiner teaches the limitations set forth above. Okerlund further discloses:
wherein the update includes a deletion of third information from the data storage of the user device, wherein the processing circuit is further structured to cause the deletion of the third information from the data storage of the user device. [0223] In this way, only those geographically-relevant incentives are ever delivered to the participant, and all stored (but not communicated) incentives are deleted if they are not "triggered."
Claims 2 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okerlund (US 2014/0279420) in view of Weiner (US 20140114846) in further view of Faith (US 20130332284).
Regarding claims 2 and 16, Okerlund in view of Weiner teaches the limitations set forth above. While Okerlund discloses the limiting of the offers/incentives sent to a user’s device to be downloaded the offers coming from a plurality of merchants participating in an incentive system and Weiner teaches a transmitted request including purchase data to determine a reward, the combination of references does not expressly disclose:
wherein the processing circuit is further structured to organize the first information and the second information in the database according to a ranking.
However Faith teaches:
wherein the processing circuit is further structured to organize the first information and the second information in the database according to a ranking. [0062] In some embodiments, the offers interface may include an input by which a user can designate an offer, such as designating offers as being a user favorite, designating offers as being ranked in a particular fashion, or designating offers as likely being of interest to some other user, such as users adjacent one another in a social graph. The offers interface may include an input for a user to make designations, such as a user selectable input labeled "add to my favorites," or "add to my wallet," and an input for a user to request offers having a designation, such as a user selectable input labeled "view my favorites." or "view my wallet."
Therefore 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 transmitted rewards/incentives of Okerlund in view of Weiner to include wherein the processing circuit is further structured to organize the first information and the second information in the database according to a ranking, as taught in Faith, in order to facilitate relatively quick identification of relevant offers by a user (paragraph 0017).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okerlund (US 2014/0279420) in view of Weiner (US 20140114846) in further view of Galinos (US 20150081415).
Regarding claim 9, Okerlund in view of Weiner teaches the limitations set forth above. While Okerlund discloses the limiting of the offers/incentives sent to a user’s device to be downloaded the offers coming from a plurality of merchants participating in an incentive system and Weiner teaches a transmitted request including purchase data to determine a reward, the combination of references does not expressly disclose:
wherein the processing circuit is further structured to receive the request from the second third-party computing system using the user device, wherein the request does not reflect the information associated with the user
However Galinos teaches:
wherein the processing circuit is further structured to receive the request from the second third-party computing system using the user device, wherein the request does not reflect the information associated with the user. [0048] It is then determined whether or not a customer transaction or purchase qualifies to receive a reward, such as a debit code (Step S902). For example, the purchase of a predetermined product and/or service, a total purchase amount greater than a predetermined amount, or membership in the store's customer loyalty program may qualify the customer to obtain a debit code. If it is determined that the transaction does not qualify for the debit code (No, Step S902), the transaction proceeds as normal, with the customer paying for the goods and/or services and obtaining a receipt without a debit code (Step S903).
Therefore 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 transmitted rewards/incentives of Okerlund in view of Weiner to include wherein the processing circuit is further structured to receive the request from the second third-party computing system using the user device, wherein the request does not reflect the information associated with the user, as taught in Galinos, in order to improve the performance of a company's personnel, companies often use promotional reward programs that provide individuals with promotional rewards. (paragraph 005).
Relevant Art Not Cited
Gershman (US 2011/0238469) discloses the distribution of post settlement/post transaction digital incentives.
Response to Arguments
With respect to the double patenting rejection, the rejection has been withdrawn in light of the claim amendments.
Applicant's arguments filed 2/25/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to the remarks directed to 35 USC 101, the examiner respectfully disagrees and maintains the rejection under 35 USC 101. The claims as shown in the updated rejection are directed to an abstract idea. The claimed invention recites steps for processing information as it relates to transactions and consumers connected to those transactions via their user accounts (see [0003 of the specification). The steps under its broadest reasonable interpretation specifically fall under sales activities. The elements of the computing systems, user device and storage, and databases are recited at a high level of generality merely carrying out the abstract idea. As such, the examiner maintains the rejection under 35 USC 101.
With respect to the remarks directed to 35 USC 103, the examiner asserts the remarks directed to Chen are now moot. The Chen reference is no longer relied up and the claims as amended are now taught by the combination of Okerlund in view of Weiner. All claims remain rejected under 35 USC 103.
Conclusion
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 VICTORIA E. FRUNZI whose telephone number is (571)270-1031. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 7-4 (EST).
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, Marissa Thein can be reached at (571) 272-6764. 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.
VICTORIA E. FRUNZI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit TC 3689
/VICTORIA E. FRUNZI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3689 4/10/2026
Prosecution Insights