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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-12 and 16-20 are elected, in response to restriction.
Claims 13-15 are non-elected.
Claims 1-12 and 16-20 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 11/13/2026 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) has/have been considered by the examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election without traverse of claims 1-12 and 16-20 in the reply filed on 06/16/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 13-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Invention.
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 1-12 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1
Step 1 of the eligibility analysis asks is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter (See MPEP § 2106.03, subsections I and II). Claims 1-12 and 16-18 are directed to a computer-implemented method (i.e., process). Claim 19 is directed to a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium (i.e., manufacture). Claim 20 is directed to a computer-implemented device (i.e., machine, and manufacture). Therefore, these claims fall within the four statutory categories of invention.
Step 2A, Prong One
Prong One asks does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon (MPEP § 2106.04(II)(A)(1)). The independent claims under a broadest reasonable interpretation recite an abstract idea because the claims describe associating wallet information and recordkeeping thereof, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas (MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2), subsection II). The claim limitations reciting the abstract idea are grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas because the limitations describe fundamental economic principles or practices, including mitigating risk, and describe commercial or legal interactions, including advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors, and business relations. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea.
Claim 1:
A control method executed by a vehicular system to be mounted on a vehicle, the control method comprising:
acquiring, from a communication terminal of a user, first wallet information indicating a first wallet associated with authentication information acquired from the communication terminal after the authentication information is determined to be valid by the vehicular system or a computer communicable with the vehicular system;
linking vehicle wallet information indicating a vehicle wallet managed by the vehicle to the first wallet information; and
storing link information indicating that the vehicle wallet information and the first wallet information are linked, in a memory in the vehicular system.
Claim 19:
A non-transitory computer-readable medium on which programmed instructions are stored, wherein the programmed instructions, when executed by a computer in a vehicular system to be mounted on a vehicle, or communicable with the vehicular system, cause the computer to perform:
acquiring, from a communication terminal of a user, first wallet information indicating a first wallet associated with authentication information acquired from the communication terminal after the authentication information is determined to be valid;
linking vehicle wallet information indicating a vehicle wallet managed by the vehicle to the first wallet information; and
storing link information indicating that the vehicle wallet information and the first wallet information are linked in a memory in the vehicular system.
Claim 20:
A control device in a vehicular system to be mounted on a vehicle or a computer capable of communicating with the vehicular system, the control device comprising:
a processor; and
a memory in which a program for causing the processor to execute a predetermined procedure is stored, wherein the processor, based on the program, performs:
acquiring, from a communication terminal of a user, first wallet information indicating a first wallet associated with authentication information acquired from the communication terminal after the authentication information is determined to be valid;
linking vehicle wallet information indicating a vehicle wallet managed by the vehicle to the first wallet information; and
storing link information indicating that the vehicle wallet information and the first wallet information are linked in a memory in the vehicular system.
Step 2A, Prong Two
Prong Two asks does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application (MPEP § 2106.04(II)(A)(2)). Examiners evaluate integration into a practical application by: (1) identifying whether there are any additional elements recited in the claim beyond the judicial exception(s); and (2) evaluating those additional elements individually and in combination to determine whether they integrate the exception into a practical application, using one or more of the considerations discussed in more detail in MPEP §§ 2106.04(d)(1), 2106.04(d)(2), 2106.05(a) through (c) and 2106.05(e) through (h). Here, the non-underlined claim limitations above recite additional elements. The additional elements do not improve the functioning of computers, another technology, or a technical field (MPEP §§ 2106.04(d)(1) and 2106.05(a)). The Specification does not assert that the invention improves upon conventional functioning of a computer, or upon conventional technology or technological processes. The claim does not purport to improve computer capabilities, but rather invokes computers merely as a tool by adding general purpose computers post-hoc to an abstract idea. A commonplace business method being applied on a general-purpose computer is not sufficient to show an improvement to technology. The claim must include more than mere instructions to perform the method on a generic component or machinery to qualify as an improvement to an existing technology. The Specification and the claim language provide evidence that the focus of the claim is on a scheme. An improvement in the abstract idea itself is not an improvement in technology. Even if the Specification describes technical improvements, they are not claimed. The additional elements do not apply the abstract idea to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition (MPEP § 2106.04(d)(2)). The additional elements do not implement the abstract idea with a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim (MPEP § 2106.05(b)). A general-purpose computer that applies a judicial exception, such as an abstract idea, by use of conventional computer functions does not qualify as a particular machine. The additional elements do not transform or reduce a particular article to a different state or thing (MPEP § 2106.05(c)). The claim does not recite any transformation of an article where the article changes to a different state or thing. Nor do the additional elements apply the abstract idea in a meaningful way or impose a meaningful limit on it beyond linking its use to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception (MPEP § 2106.05(e)). The additional elements generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment. A wholly generic computer implementation is not generally the sort of additional feature that provides any practical assurance that the process is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the abstract idea itself. The additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea (MPEP § 2106.05(f)). Implementing an abstract idea on a generic computer, does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, similar to how the recitation of the computer in the claim in Alice amounted to mere instructions to apply the abstract idea of intermediated settlement on a generic computer. Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks or simply adding a general-purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application. The additional elements are being used in their ordinary capacity. The additional elements do no more than merely invoke computers or machinery as a tool to perform an existing process. The additional elements generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use (MPEP § 2106.05(h)). Limitations that amount to merely indicating a field of use or technological environment in which to apply a judicial exception cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application. Thus, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Accordingly, the claims are directed to the abstract idea identified above.
Step 2B
Step 2B determines whether the claim as a whole amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself (MPEP § 2106.05). In Step 2B examiners carry over their identification of the additional element(s) in the claim from Step 2A Prong Two; carry over their conclusions from Step 2A Prong Two on the considerations discussed in MPEP §§ 2106.05(a)-(c), (e), (f) and (h); re-evaluate any additional element or combination of elements that was considered to be insignificant extra-solution activity per MPEP § 2106.05(g), because if such re-evaluation finds that the element is unconventional or otherwise more than what is well-understood, routine, conventional activity in the field, this finding may indicate that the additional element is no longer considered to be insignificant; and evaluate whether any additional element or combination of elements are other than what is well-understood, routine, conventional activity in the field, or simply append well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality, to the judicial exception, per MPEP § 2106.05(d). The additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea (MPEP § 2106.05(f)). The additional elements generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use (MPEP § 2106.05(h)). Individually, the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. Here, the additional elements simply append well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality, to the judicial exception, e.g., a claim to an abstract idea requiring no more than a generic computer to perform generic computer functions that are well-understood, routine and conventional activities previously known to the industry. A factual determination is required to support a conclusion that an additional element (or combination of additional elements) is well-understood, routine, conventional activity. Here, the specification of the application indicates that additional elements are well-known or conventional (See Spec. 0027-0041). There is nothing in the specification to indicate that the operations recited in the claims require any specialized hardware or inventive computer components or that the claimed invention is implemented using other than generic computer components to perform generic computer functions. The ordered combination recites no more than the individual elements do. Thus, the additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea. Accordingly, the claims are directed to the abstract idea identified above without significantly more. The claims are not eligible, warranting a rejection for lack of subject matter eligibility and concluding the eligibility analysis.
Dependent Claims
Claim 2 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes associating wallet information and recordkeeping thereof, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0027-0041). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
wherein the communication terminal manages a plurality of electronic keys available to the user and a plurality of pieces of wallet information indicating a plurality of wallets held by the user in association with each other,
the authentication information includes a first electronic key selected by the user from the plurality of electronic keys, and
the first wallet information associated with the first electronic key among the plurality of pieces of wallet information managed by the communication terminal is acquired from the communication terminal after the authentication information is determined to be valid.
Claim 3 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes associating wallet information and recordkeeping thereof, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0027-0041). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
wherein the plurality of pieces of wallet information are information related to a plurality of settlement services available to the user, and
the first electronic key is selected based on one selected by the user from among the plurality of settlement services via a GUI of the communication terminal.
Claim 4 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes associating wallet information and recordkeeping thereof, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0027-0041). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
wherein the plurality of electronic keys include a company key associated with a company to which the user belongs and a personal key of the user,
company wallet information indicating a company wallet managed by the company is linked to the vehicle wallet information as the first wallet information in a case where the selected first electronic key is the company key, and
personal wallet information indicating a wallet of the user is linked to the vehicle wallet information as the first wallet information in a case where the selected first electronic key is the personal key.
Claim 5 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes associating wallet information and recordkeeping thereof, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0027-0041). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
executing, in response to a request by an external device outside the vehicle or the vehicular system, a payment process for paying money to an external wallet of the external device from the first wallet via the vehicle wallet,
wherein the payment process includes paying money to the external wallet from the vehicle wallet based on the vehicle wallet information, and receiving money paid from the first wallet to the vehicle wallet based on the vehicle wallet information and the first wallet information.
Claim 6 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes associating wallet information and recordkeeping thereof, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0027-0041). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
wherein payment of the money from the vehicle wallet to the external wallet is made without transmitting an ID for identifying the user or the communication terminal, and the first wallet information to the external device.
Claim 7 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes associating wallet information and recordkeeping thereof, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0027-0041). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
wherein the vehicle wallet information includes a vehicle wallet address indicating an address of the vehicle wallet,
the first wallet information includes a first wallet address indicating an address of the first wallet,
payment from the vehicle wallet to the external wallet is made by recording, on a block chain, a first payment transaction using an address of the external wallet acquired from the external device and the vehicle wallet address, and
payment from the first wallet to the vehicle wallet is made by recording, on the block chain, a second payment transaction using the first wallet address and the vehicle wallet.
Claim 8 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes associating wallet information and recordkeeping thereof, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0027-0041). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
wherein the payment from the vehicle wallet to the external wallet is made at a first timing when a request for payment occurs between the external device and the vehicle, and
the payment from the first wallet to the vehicle wallet is made at a second timing after the first timing.
Claim 9 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes associating wallet information and recordkeeping thereof, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0027-0041). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
wherein the second timing is a timing at which the user suspends or ends use of the vehicle, or a timing at which a preset period ends.
Claim 10 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes associating wallet information and recordkeeping thereof, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0027-0041). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
wherein payment of a first amount of money requested by the external device is made in the payment from the vehicle wallet to the external wallet, and
payment of a second amount of money different from the first amount of money is made in the payment from the first wallet to the vehicle wallet.
Claim 11 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes associating wallet information and recordkeeping thereof, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0027-0041). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
acquiring permission information from the communication terminal in advance after linking the vehicle wallet information to the first wallet information,
wherein the permission information indicates that the vehicular system has temporary authority to request and execute money transfer from the first wallet to the vehicle wallet, and
the vehicular system executes receipt of payment from the first wallet to the vehicle wallet based on the permission information before or after the payment from the vehicle wallet to the external wallet.
Claim 12 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes associating wallet information and recordkeeping thereof, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0027-0041). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
wherein the payment from the first wallet to the vehicle wallet is made in advance by transferring a predetermined amount from the first wallet to the vehicle wallet after linking the vehicle wallet information to the first wallet information, and
the payment from the vehicle wallet to the external wallet is made within the predetermined amount at a timing when a request for payment occurs between the external device and the vehicle.
Claim 16 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes associating wallet information and recordkeeping thereof, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0027-0041). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
wherein after the payment process, a payment report indicating that the payment process is completed is displayed on a display mounted on the vehicle; and
display content of the payment report includes a display object for identifying the external device.
Claim 17 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes associating wallet information and recordkeeping thereof, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0027-0041). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
wherein the plurality of electronic keys include a company key associated with a company to which the user belongs and a personal key of the user,
in a case where the selected first electronic key is the company key, company wallet information indicating a company wallet managed by the company is linked to the vehicle wallet information as the first wallet information, and
after the payment process, a payment report indicating that the payment process using the company wallet is completed is transmitted to a company server associated with the company to which the user belongs, and
in a case where the selected first electronic key is the personal key,
personal wallet information indicating a wallet of the user is linked to the vehicle wallet information as the first wallet information, and
after the payment process, a payment report indicating that the payment process using the wallet of the user is completed is transmitted to the communication terminal or a personal server used by the user.
Claim 18 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes associating wallet information and recordkeeping thereof, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0027-0041). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
performing, in response to a request by an external device outside the vehicle or the vehicle, a reception process for receiving money paid to the first wallet via the vehicle wallet from an external wallet of the external device,
wherein the reception process includes:
receiving money paid from the external wallet to the vehicle wallet based on the vehicle wallet information; and
remitting money from the vehicle wallet to the first wallet based on the vehicle wallet information and the first wallet information.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 20 is 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.
Unclear Scope
Claim 20 recites "A control device in a vehicular system … comprising: … and a memory … performs: … storing … in a memory in the vehicular system.”. However, it is unclear whether these two recitations of a memory refer to the same or a different memory. Therefore, these claims are indefinite and are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. For the purpose of compact prosecution, Examiner is interpreting claim as referring to the same memory. See In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319, 13USPQ2d 1320 (Fed. Cir. 1989) and MPEP 2173.02 (III)(B) which states “Examiners should bear in mind that "[a]n essential purpose of patent examination is to fashion claims that are precise, clear, correct, and unambiguous. Only in this way can uncertainties of claim scope be removed, as much as possible, during the administrative process.”
Claims Free of Art
Claims 1-12 and 16-20 are free of art. The closest prior art of record is US 2022/0374875 A1 (“Madisetti”). Madisetti teaches:
linking vehicle wallet information indicating a vehicle wallet managed by the vehicle to the first wallet information; and (0070-0073, 0106, 0108)
storing link information indicating that the vehicle wallet information and the first wallet information are linked, in a memory in the vehicular system. (0070-0073, 0106, 0108)
Therefore, the prior art does not teach, neither singly nor in combination the following:
acquiring, from a communication terminal of a user, first wallet information indicating a first wallet associated with authentication information acquired from the communication terminal after the authentication information is determined to be valid by the vehicular system or a computer communicable with the vehicular system;
Conclusion
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 11,126,998 B1 (“Bodkin”) discloses: Systems and methods that facilitate performing multiple transactions at once using a vehicle-based wallet are disclosed herein. The vehicle-based wallet can link to a plurality of mobile wallets and perform singular transactions with ATMs and POS machines, the singular transactions being a group transaction associated with one or more of the mobile wallets. The vehicle-based wallet can collect intended transactions between the ATMs and the POS machines and the mobile wallets, and then gather them together and perform a single group transaction made up of the individual transactions for multiple people that are within the vehicle.
US 2015/0095190 A1 (“Hammad”) discloses: The AUTOMOBILE MOBILE-INTERACTION PLATFORM APPARATUSES, METHODS AND SYSTEMS (“AMIP”) The AMIP transforms cloud-based wallet and automobile settings into transaction and automobile outputs. In some embodiments, a user may request to connect an electronic wallet account to an automobile interface. Once the user's credentials have been authenticated, the automobile interface may request and receive from a remote server automobile-related and payment-method-related settings. The automobile interface may then configure its settings according to the received information.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ari Shahabi whose telephone number is (571)272-2565. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8:00-5:00.
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, John W Hayes can be reached at 571-272-6708. 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.
/ARI SHAHABI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3697
Prosecution Insights