Detailed Action
Acknowledgements
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This action is in reply to the Amendment filed on March 16, 2026.
Claim 10 is cancelled.
Claims 1-9 and 11-20 are pending.
Claims 1-9 and 11-20 are examined.
This Office Action is given Paper No. 20260506 for references purposes only.
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 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 1-9 and 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Edupuganti et al. (US 2025/0217806) in view of Yasui et al. (US 2020/0160335).
Claims 1, 14, 17
Edupuganti discloses:
a management server (issuer, see [0019]) including a third hardware processor (processor, see [0090]);
a first terminal (first transaction terminal, see [0019]) of a proxy individual of a first target (first member of proxy transaction account group, see [0017]), the first terminal including a first hardware processor and a first short-range wireless communication device; and
a second terminal (second transaction terminal, see [0019]) of a target individual of a second target (second member of proxy transaction account group, see [0017]), the second terminal including a second hardware processor (processor, see [0090]) and a second short-range wireless communication device, wherein the first hardware processor included in the first terminal is programmed to:
receive, from a terminal of a proxy requesting individual of the first target, authority imparting information (proxy account rules, see [0026]) for notifying imparting of an agency;
at least one of the first hardware processor (first transaction terminal, see [0019]) and the second hardware processor is programmed to transmit a linking demand including an authentication request (transaction authorization request, see [0019]) for the proxy requesting individual (member of the proxy transaction account, see [0019]) toward the management server (issuer, see [0019]) upon success of the verification of the agency by the second terminal, and
the third hardware processor included in the management server is programmed to set, upon successful authentication for the proxy requesting individual responding to the authentication request, a correspondence relation (transaction amount split according to predefined percentage or ratio for each member, see [0073]) between the proxy requesting individual and the target individual.
Edupuganti does not disclose:
Perform… individual;
Transmit… agency;
The second… terminal;
To thereby…individual.
Yasui teaches:
perform data exchange between the first short-range wireless communication device (detection device, see [0053]) included in the first terminal (accounting device, see [0053]) and the second short-range wireless communication device (contactless IC chip, see [0044]) included in the second terminal (communication terminal, see [0044]) by short-range wireless communication (wireless communication via a mobile network, see [0043]) when a use relation occurs (usage fee, see [0045-0046]) between the proxy individual (ETC system, see [0050]) and the target individual (user of rental car, see [0036]); and
transmit authority verification information (divided usage fee, see [0106]) to the second terminal in the data exchange to request verification of the agency,
the second hardware processor included in the second terminal is programmed to verify the agency (user identified for each seat, see [0106]) using the authority verification information in response to a request from the first terminal;
to thereby enable proxy exercise of an authority of the proxy requesting individual over the second target by the proxy individual so that the proxy individual (ETC system, see [0050]) associated with the first terminal controls the second target (rental car, see [0037]) associated with the second terminal as a proxy of the proxy requesting individual (vehicle service provider, see [0050]).
Edupuganti discloses a management server, a first terminal, a second terminal, receiving authority imparting information, transmitting a linking demand, and setting a correspondence relation. Edupuganti does not disclose performing a data exchange, transmitting authority verification information, verifying agency, and the proxy individual controlling the second target, but Yasui does. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to combine the occasion-based proxy transaction account groups of Edupuganti with the performing a data exchange, transmitting authority verification information, verifying agency, and the proxy individual controlling the second target of Yasui because 1) a need exists for creating a proxy transaction account for a group of members (see Edupuganti [0012]); and 2) a need exists for supporting a user of a vehicle to pay various fees simply (see Yasui [0010]). Performing a data exchange, transmitting authority verification information, verifying agency, and the proxy individual controlling the second target allows for a user of a rental car to be uniquely identified and charged accordingly (see Yasui [0082]).
Claim 2
Furthermore, Edupuganti discloses:
an expiration date (expiration date, see [0017]) is set for the agency, and
the third hardware processor included in the management server is further programmed to release the correspondence relation between the proxy requesting individual and the target individual (members can be removed, see [0018]) according to arrival of the expiration date (expiration date associated with proxy transaction account, see [0017]).
Claim 3
Furthermore, Edupuganti discloses:
an effective authority (proxy transaction group, see [0017]) is set for the agency, and
the third hardware processor included in the management server is further programmed to release the correspondence relation between the proxy requesting individual and the target individual (members can be removed, see [0018]) according to exercise or extinction of the effective authority by the proxy individual (expiration date associated with proxy transaction account, see [0017]).
Claim 4
Furthermore, Edupuganti discloses:
the third hardware processor included in the management server is further programmed to release the correspondence relation between the proxy requesting individual and the target individual in response to reception of a release demand (proxy account rule includes expiration date, see [0041]) from the terminal of the proxy requesting individual.
Claim 5
Furthermore, Edupuganti discloses:
the third hardware processor included in the management server is further programmed to release the correspondence relation between the proxy requesting individual and the target individual according to a second correspondence relation (proxy account rule includes expiration date, see [0041]) between the proxy requesting individual and another individual of the second target being set by the proxy requesting individual.
Claims 6, 19
Furthermore, Edupuganti discloses:
the authority verification information includes a contact (lead member, see [0017]) that executes approval processing, and
the second hardware processor is programmed to verify the agency by:
making an inquiry with the contact (lead member defines group rules, see [0017]) included in the authority verification information (checking proxy account rules, see [0032, 0078]); and
receiving an answer of approval as an execution result of the approval processing (e.g. transaction amount is within approved budget, see [0032, 0078]).
Claims 7, 20
Furthermore, Edupuganti discloses:
the second hardware processor included in the second terminal is further programmed to receive notification of authentication information (authorization notification, see [0069]) from the terminal of the proxy requesting individual,
the authority verification information, which is transmitted from the first hardware processor to the second hardware processor, includes proxy authentication information (proxy account rules, see [0032, 0078]) corresponding to the authentication information, and
the second hardware processor is programmed to verify the agency by collating the proxy authentication information included in the authority verification information and the authentication information (e.g. transaction amount is within approved budget, see [0032, 0078]) notified from the terminal of the proxy requesting individual.
Claim 8
Furthermore, Edupuganti discloses:
the at least one of the first hardware processor and the second hardware processor is programmed to transmit the linking demand (transaction authorization request, see [0019]) toward the management server (issuer, see [0019]) by directly transmitting (sends, see [0019]) the linking demand to the management server or indirectly transmitting the linking demand to the management server via an external server.
Claim 9
Furthermore, Edupuganti discloses:
success of authentication responding to the authentication request (authorize or deny, see [0033]) is determined by the management server (issuer, see [0033]) or an external server.
Claim 11
Furthermore, Edupuganti discloses:
the first terminal further includes a positioning module, the first hardware processor included in the first terminal is further programmed to: measure a current position of the first terminal (transaction location information, see [0084]) with the positioning module of the first terminal (transaction terminal, see [0019]); and
transmit a measurement result of the current position of the first terminal toward the management server (issuer, see [0084]),
the second terminal further includes a positioning module, the second hardware processor included in the second terminal is further programmed to: measure a current position of the second terminal (a location of the transaction, see [0040]) with the positioning module of the second terminal (second user of the group, see [0039]); and
transmit a measurement result of the current position of the second terminal toward the management server (issuer, see [0084]), and
the third hardware processor included in the management server is further programmed to: after setting the correspondence relation between the proxy requesting individual and the target individual, receive the measurement results (locations, see [0040, 0084]) of the current positions of the first terminal and the second terminal from the first terminal and the second terminal;
determine, in real time, whether the received measurement results of the current positions of the first terminal and the second terminal satisfy a condition of the use relation (permitted merchant locations, see [0041, 0054]); and
when the measurement results of the current positions of the first terminal and the second terminal satisfy the condition of the use relation, maintain the setting of the correspondence relation between the proxy requesting individual and the target individual and (allow transaction, see [0069]), otherwise, release the correspondence relation to disable the proxy exercise of the authority of the proxy requesting individual over the second target by the proxy individual.
Furthermore, Yasui teaches:
wherein the condition of the use relation is satisfied when the current position of the first terminal and the current position of the second terminal are within a predetermined range (at the tollgate, see [0039]).
Claim 12
Furthermore, Yasui teaches:
wherein the first target is a user (user, see [0037]),
the proxy individual of the first target is a proxy user (vehicle service provider, see [0037]),
the proxy requesting individual of the first target is a proxy requesting user (user, see [0037]), and
the second target is an object (rental car, see [0036]) to be used by the user.
Claim 13
Furthermore, Yasui teaches:
the object to be used is a mobile body (rental car, see [0036]).
Claim 15
Furthermore, Edupuganti discloses:
at least one of an expiration date (expiration date, see [0017]) and an effective authority is set for the agency.
Claim 16
Furthermore, Edupuganti discloses:
the authority verification information includes a contact (lead member, see [0017]) that executes approval processing or proxy authentication information (proxy account rules, see [0041]) used for the verification.
Claim 18
Furthermore, Edupuganti discloses:
at least one of an expiration date (expiration date, see [0017]) and an effective authority is set for the agency.
Response to Arguments
101 arguments
Applicant argues that 1) the claimed invention is not directed to an abstract idea; 2) the claim integrates the abstract idea into a practical application involving interactions between four different terminals; 3) the added elements are not a conventional, routine, or well-known activity.
Examiner has withdrawn the 101 rejection for reasons explained in the Amendment filed on March 16, 2026 pages 12-13.
103 arguments
Applicant argues that the prior art does not disclose performing a data exchange between a first device and the second device by short-range wireless communication, and enabling proxy exercise of an authority of the proxy requesting individual over a second target.
Examiner disagrees. Yasui teaches performing a data exchange between a first device (detection device) and a second device (contactless IC chip) by short-range wireless communication. Yasui also teaches enabling proxy exercise of an authority of the proxy requesting individual (vehicle service provider) over a second target (rental car). Please see revised rejection above.
Claim Interpretation
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure (see attached form PTO-892).
Doig et al. (US 2019/0096243) discloses a method and system for a proxy vehicular intelligent transportation system station.
Examiner hereby adopts the following definitions under the broadest reasonable interpretation standard. In accordance with In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1056, 44 USPQ2d 1023, 1029 (Fed. Cir. 1997), Examiner points to these other sources to support her interpretation of the claims.1 Additionally, these definitions are only a guide to claim terminology since claim terms must be interpreted in context of the surrounding claim language. Finally, the following list is not intended to be exhaustive in any way:
configuration “(1) (A) (software) The arrangement of a computer system or component as defined by the number, nature, and interconnections of its constituent parts.” “(C) The physical and logical elements of an information processing system, the manner in which they are organized and connected, or both. Note: May refer to hardware configuration or software configuration.” IEEE 100 The Authoritative Dictionary of IEEE Standards Terms, 7th Edition, IEEE, Inc., New York, NY, Dec. 2000.
server “2. On the Internet or other network, a computer or program that responds to commands from a client.” Computer Dictionary, 3rd Edition, Microsoft Press, Redmond, WA, 1997.
terminal “(4) (networks) A point at which any element may be directly connected to one or more other elements.” IEEE 100 The Authoritative Dictionary of IEEE Standards Terms, 7th Edition, IEEE, Inc., New York, NY, Dec. 2000.
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 of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or concerning this communication or earlier communications from Examiner should be directed to Chrystina Zelaskiewicz whose telephone number is 571-270-3940. Examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, 9:30am-5:00pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s supervisor, Neha Patel can be reached at 571-270-1492.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal/pair <http://pair-direct.uspto.gov>. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866.217.9197 (toll-free).
/CHRYSTINA E ZELASKIEWICZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3699
1 While most definition(s) are cited because these terms are found in the claims, Examiner may have provided additional definition(s) to help interpret words, phrases, or concepts found in the definitions themselves or in the prior art.
Prosecution Insights