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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Applicant filed an RCE on 12/2/25. Claims 1-21 were and are pending. Claims 1,10,11, 20 have been amended. After careful consideration of applicant arguments and amendments, the examiner finds them to be moot and/or non persuasive. This action is a non-final office action.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/2/25 has been entered.
Claim Objections
In regards to claim 1, A payment processing system, should be followed by the payment processing system Scanning controller, product id scanned by the optical scanner a plurality of scanned products, then “the scanned products” are these all the same products or different? For the purposes of examination the examiner assumes these are the same.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Here applicant by amendment adds by amendment on 12/2/25, to claim 1,
“and use the scanning controller to ascertain the product price from a product ID scanned by the optical scanner without accessing an external point-of-sale system, and wherein the firewall “
The limitation appears to be distinguishing over the art but, on review of the applicant specification and initially filed claims, the “without accessing” element is not found. While applicant references parts of the spec for example 0021, it appears that the best reading on this is that the EFTPOS can ascertain the product data itself.
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.
The claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
The claims 1-21 recite(s) (claim 1 is independent), a system for implementing a product purchase reward scheme…
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because it is merely apply generic computers and computing components to a well known abstract idea.
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because using a terminal, a display and other generic elements to carry out a purchase reward scheme is essentially an abstract idea without more.
Here a “system” claim is directed to a statutory category.
It appears that the general process is to offer rewards to the user by use of generic elements such as an optical scanner, a terminal, card reader, digital display, scanning controller and now a firewall, encryption module and a reward scheme server.
These limitations at their broadest reasonable interpretation cover performance of the limitation as certain methods of organizing human activity (see claim 1) scanning of a card for purchase and/or reward purpose is essentially a fundamental economic practice. Accordingly the claim recites an abstract idea. The above computer elements are just “apply it” type recitations. The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. As currently claimed these are mere instructions to implement an abstract idea without more.
The following elements from the dependent claims might be helpful if incorporated, claim 11 “one way hashing” though it appears that the claim 11 has not been fully incorporated.
Claims 2-21 are dependent on claim 1 but do not add further elements aside from claim 11 which has a hashing process.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
US patent Publication 20140207680 to Rephlo in view of US Patent to Kalgi 10803449 and US Patent 7295992 to Villaret
As per claim 1 Rephlo discloses;
A payment processing system for implementing a product purchase reward payment, the system comprising:
an EFTPOS terminal; an optical scanner in operable communication with the EFTPOS terminal using a scanning controller, wherein the EFTPOS terminal comprises: G(0018)
Rephlo(0069)
a firewall configured to implement data protection; an encryption module configured to encrypt cardholder data and encrypt transmission of cardholder data to a reward scheme server
Rephlo(encrypted data transmission 0033)
See also Kalgi (Col. 14, lines 1-35, encryption)
wherein the EFTPOS terminal
is configured to store the product data locally in the memory device
Rephlo(0069)
and use the scanning controller to ascertain the product price from a product ID scanned by the optical scanner without accessing an external point-of-sale system, and wherein the firewall
Rephlo(fig. 2) or Villaret(col. 2 lines 20-350 integrated)
are integrated within the EFTPOS terminal to secure both the locally stored product data and the transmission of transaction data
to the reward scheme server; Rephlo(0015 rewards pushed to the user)
a digital display and a user interface controller configured to display a plurality of scanned products on the digital display and wherein the EFTPOS terminal is configured to calculate a total amount of the scanned products;
Rephlo(0069)
a card reader and payment controller configured to read a PAN from a card for initiating a financial transaction for the total amount; Rephlo(0040, account number)
a server interface controller configured to transmit transaction data to a reward scheme server, the transaction data comprising product IDs of the scanned products.
Rephlo(0117 rewards platform)
Rephlo does not explicitly disclose what Kalgi teaches;
and encryption module Kalgi (Col. 14, lines 1-35, encryption)
and, wherein the payment controller is configured to generate and store a hash of the PAN using a one-way hashing algorithm; Kalgi(col. 64, discloses a one way hashing , col. 11 hash code to store secure credentials)
It would therefore have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine electronic wallet teachings of Kalgi with the EFTPOS disclosure of Replo for the motivation of assisting in “online purchases where cash is not always available” (col. 1 lines 35-40)
Rephlo and Kalgi do not explicitly disclose what Villaret teaches;
a memory device preprogrammed with product data comprising product IDs stored in relation to respective product prices Villaret(col. 11 lines 1-10… product is selected for purchase using the terminal….. )
It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the firewall of Villaret with the card based security of Graylin for the motivation of providing a high level of security for ETFPOS systems. (col. 2 lines 1-15)
As per claim 2, Rephlo does not explicitly disclose what Kalgi teaches;
The system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the EFTPOS terminal is PCI compliant.
K(col. 57 lines 25-30)
It would therefore have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine electronic wallet teachings of Kalgi with the EFTPOS disclosure of Replo for the motivation of assisting in “online purchases where cash is not always available” (col. 1 lines 35-40)
As per claim 3 Rephlo discloses; discloses; The system as claimed in claim 2, wherein the EFTPOS terminal is compliant wherein the EFTPOS terminal is configured to perform at least one of: implements password protection; access restriction to and encryption of cardholder data; transmission encryption of cardholder data to the reward scheme server; and creation of access logs.
Rephlo (0055 passwords, one of requires only one)
Claim(s) 4-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
US patent Publication 20140207680 to Rephlo in view of US Patent to Kalgi 10803449 and US Patent 7295992 to Villaret further in view of US Patent Publication 20220405740 to Graylin
As per claim 4 Rephlo, Kalgi and Villaret do not explicitly disclose Graylin teaches; The system as claimed in claim 20 wherein the transaction data further comprises other data, wherein at least one of the rules is associated with a criterion and wherein the rule controller is configured to further determine whether the other data fulfils the criterion.
G(0288, no specifics required) It would therefor have been obvious to combine the reward system of Rephlo with the marking technology of Graylin for the motivation of “expanding enterprise opportunities”
As per claim 5 Rephlo does not explicitly disclose what Kalgi teaches;
he system as claimed in claim 4, wherein the other data comprises a merchant ID.
K (Col. 66 lines 15-20)
It would therefore have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine electronic wallet teachings of Kalgi with the EFTPOS disclosure of Rephlo for the motivation of assisting in “online purchases where cash is not always available” (col. 1 lines 35-40)
As per claim 6 Rephlo, Kalgi and Villaret do not explicitly disclose what Graylin teaches;; The system as claimed in claim 4, wherein the other data comprises a location and wherein the criterion specifies a region.
G(0170). The motivation would be similar to that for claim 4.
As per claim 7 4 Rephlo, Kalgi and Villaret do not disclose what Graylin teaches; The system as claimed in claim 4, wherein the other data comprises a product price G(0242, price), However, Kalgi teaches The concept of thresholds are discussed in Kalgi Col. 35 ) The motivation for the combination would be similar to that provided in claim 4.
As per claim 8 4 Rephlo, Kalgi and Villaret do not explicitly disclose what Graylin teaches; The system as claimed in claim 4, wherein the criterion is a time-of- day criterion. G(0258)
The motivation for the combination would be similar to that provided in claim 4.
As per claim 9 Rephlo does not explicitly disclose what Kalgi teaches; The system as claimed in claim 20, wherein more than one rule is associated with a product ID.
K(col. 3 lines 20-25)
It would therefore have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine electronic wallet teachings of Kalgi with the EFTPOS disclosure of Rephlo for the motivation of assisting in “online purchases where cash is not always available” (col. 1 lines 35-40)
As per claim 10 Rephlo discloses; The system as claimed in claim 21, wherein: the EFTPOS terminal is configured to transmit the PAN to the reward program server with the transaction data; the payment controller is further configured to store the PAN in the transaction log against the transaction ID; and the refund controller is configured to select the PAN from the transaction log using the transaction ID.
V(fig. 5 rewards., 0034, account number, 0040 )
As per claim 11, Rephlo does not explicitly disclose what Kalgi teaches;
The system as claimed in claim 21, wherein the payment controller is configured to generate and store a hash of the PAN using a one-way hashing algorithm the hash is stored in the transaction log against the transaction ID and the refund controller is configured to: receive a further PAN number obtained by the EFTPOS terminal from a payment card; generate a further hash of the further PAN using the one-way hashing algorithm; and compare the hash and the further hash.
K(COL. 11 Lines 40-45)
It would therefore have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine electronic wallet teachings of Kalgi with the EFTPOS disclosure of Rephlo for the motivation of assisting in “online purchases where cash is not always available” (col. 1 lines 35-40)
As per claim 12 Rephlo, Kalgi and Villaret do not explicitly disclose Graylin teaches; The system as claimed in claim 21,wherein the EFTPOS terminal is configured to display options to either: refund the transaction amount wherein the refund controller causes the payment controller to initiate a reversal financial transaction according to the transaction amount using the PAN; or refund a partial transaction amount wherein the EFTPOS terminal transmits the partial transaction amount to the server and the refund controller causes the payment controller to initiate a reversal financial transaction according to the partial transaction amount using the PAN.
G(0049)
The motivation for the combination would be similar to that found in claim 4.
As per claim 13 Rephlo discloses;
The system as claimed in claim 21,wherein the EFTPOS terminal is configured to display options to either: refund the reward amount only wherein the refund controller causes the payment controller to initiate the at least one reversal financial transaction according to the reward amount using the PAN; or refund a transaction amount and the reward amount wherein: the refund controller determines the transaction amount using the transaction log and causes the payment controller to initiate a reversal financial transaction according to the transaction amount using the PAN; and the refund controller causes the payment controller to initiate a reversal financial transaction according to the reward amount using the PAN.
Rephlo (refunds 0087 and rewards 0014)
See also Villaret (COL. 11, points reward)
As per claim 14, Rephlo does not explicitly disclose what Kalgi teaches; The system as claimed in claim 21,wherein the payment controller is further configured to store a plurality of product IDs in the transaction log against the transaction ID.
K(col. 3 lines 20-25)
It would therefore have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine electronic wallet teachings of Kalgi with the EFTPOS disclosure of Rephlo for the motivation of assisting in “online purchases where cash is not always available” (col. 1 lines 35-40)
As per claim 15 Rephlo discloses; The system as claimed in claim 14, wherein the EFTPOS terminal is configured to display an option to refund all products wherein the refund controller is configured to select the plurality of product IDs using the transaction ID, and, for each product ID, cause the payment controller to initiate a reversal financial transaction according to any reward amount associated with each product ID. Rephlo (0087, returns)
As per claim 16 Rephlo does not explicitly disclose what Kalgi teaches; ) The system as claimed in claim 15, wherein the refund controller is further configured to cause the payment controller to initiate a reversal financial transaction according to a total transaction amount of the products.
K(col. 3lines 55-60)
It would therefore have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine electronic wallet teachings of Kalgi with the EFTPOS disclosure of Rephlo for the motivation of assisting in “online purchases where cash is not always available” (col. 1 lines 35-40)
As per claim 17 Rephlo does not explicitly disclose what Kalgi teaches;
The system as claimed in claim 14, wherein the EFTPOS terminal is configured to display an option to refund a subset of products and to transmit selected product IDs of the subset of products to the server, wherein the refund controller is configured to select a subset of product IDs using the selected product IDs, and, for each product ID, cause the payment controller to initiate a reversal financial transaction according to any reward amount associated with each product ID.
Kalgi(col. 6 lines 20-25)
It would therefore have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine electronic wallet teachings of Kalgi with the EFTPOS disclosure of Rephlo for the motivation of assisting in “online purchases where cash is not always available” (col. 1 lines 35-40)
As per claim 18 Rephlo discloses; The system as claimed in claim 17, wherein the refund controller is further configured to cause the payment controller to initiate a reversal financial transaction according to a total transaction amount of the subset of the products.
Rephlo(0087, refunds are a type of activity which cause a refund/reversal)
As per claim Rephlo does not explicitly disclose what Kalgi teaches; The system as claimed in claim 10, wherein a product ID is transmitted from the EFTPOS terminal to the server and wherein the refund controller is configured to verify the product ID against the transaction log.
K(Col. 15 lines 1-15, providers are identified)
It would therefore have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine electronic wallet teachings of Kalgi with the EFTPOS disclosure of Rephlo for the motivation of assisting in “online purchases where cash is not always available” (col. 1 lines 35-40)
As per claim 20 4 Rephlo, Kalgi and Villaret do not explicitly disclose Graylin teaches;; The system as claimed in claim 1, further comprising the reward scheme server in operable communication with the EFTPOS terminal across a wide area network, wherein the reward scheme server comprises:a database comprising a plurality of reward rules, each associated with an associated product ID; a rule controller configured to: retrieve at least one rule matching a product ID; determine a reward amount associated with the rule; determine a provider ID associated with the rule; cause a payment controller to: initiate at least one financial transaction according to the provider ID and the reward amount; and store a transaction log comprising a transaction ID of the financial transaction.
G(0243, store coupons)
The motivation for combination would be similar to that found in claim 4.
As per claim 21 4 Rephlo, Kalgi and Villaret do not explicitly disclose Graylin teaches; The system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the reward scheme server further comprises a refund controller configured to: receive the transaction ID from the EFTPOS terminal; select the transaction from the transaction log using the transaction ID; and cause the pa
G(0076)
The motivation for combination would be similar to that found in claim 4.
Response to Arguments
Applicant filed an RCE on 12/2/25. Claims 1-21 were and are pending. Claims 1,10,11, 20 have been amended. After careful consideration of applicant arguments and amendments, the examiner finds them to be moot and/or non persuasive. This action is a non-final office action.
Rejection of Claims Under 35 USC 101 –
In regards to practical application, it would have to be a practical application of technology.
Practical Application Indicators.
Claim 1 as amended now recites specific technological security features that transform any abstract concept into a concrete technological solution. The amended claim specifically recites "a firewall configured to implement data protection, "an encryption module configured to encrypt cardholder data and encrypt transmission of cardholder data to a reward scheme server," and "wherein the payment controller is configured to generate and store a hash of the PANusing a one-way hashing algorithm." These limitations represent
specific technological implementations that address concrete technical problems in payment processing security and go well beyond generic computer components performing abstract functions.
The examiner specifically noted that claim 11's "one-way hashing" limitation might be helpful if incorporated, and amended claim 1 now includes this technical feature. As described in the specification, "[i]n embodiments to avoid having to store PANs (even in encrypted format), a one-way hash of the PAN is stored in the transaction log and wherein a PAN obtained by the EFTPOS terminal from the customer's payment card is hashed using the same one-way hash algorithm to verify that the same payment card is being used for the refund transaction as was used for the original transaction." Applicant's Specification, paragraph [0079]. This represents a specific cryptographic security mechanism that addresses the technical problem of securely handling sensitive payment data while enabling refund functionality without storing the actual PAN.
The system as recited by amended claim 1 is designed to overcome "technical challenges of conventional payment systems of obtaining product data and/or adhering to PCI standards when implementing a reward scheme." Specification, paragraph [0010]. The EFTPOS terminal is specifically configured to be "fully PCI compliant to thereby interface with a card scheme" and "implements a data protection firewall, implements password protection, restricts access to and encrypts cardholder data, encrypts transmission of cardholder data to the reward scheme server and creates access logs." Specification, paragraphs [0019] and [0048]. These are not merely generic computer functions but specific technical security requirements mandated by payment card industry standards that require particular technological implementations.
The combination of the modified EFTPOS terminal with preprogrammed product data, cryptographic hashing, encryption modules, and PCI-compliant security features as recited by amended claim 1 represents a specific technological solution that improves the functioning of payment processing systems. The claimed system integrates the reward processing concept into a practical technological application through specific security mechanisms rather than merely applying generic computers to an abstract business method.
Here, the tie to technical concepts is an improvement but, under current interpretations, the improvement to the technology itself is not claimed.
Rejection of Claims Under 35 USC 103
Claims 1-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Publication to Graylin 20220405740 in view of US Patent to Kalgi 10803449 and US Patent 7295992 to Villaret.
Moot in view of updated grounds of rejection.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure from a search of IP.com
Cashless transaction for resort club amenities using RFID technology, IEEE 2017
Card-based Macropayment for Mobile Phones, IEEE 2008
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRUCE I EBERSMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-3442. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 am - 5:00 pm Monday-Friday.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Michael W Anderson can be reached at 571-270-0508. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BRUCE I EBERSMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3693