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
This action is in reply to response to restriction requirement filed on 11/14/25. Claims 1-6 are withdrawn. Claims 7-14 are pending and examined.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 1-6 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected group I, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 11/14/2025.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No.EP23202068.5, filed on 10/06/23.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on 10/2/24. The submission was in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement was considered by the examiner.
Examiner’s Note
The claims recite eligible subject matter because the claims recite additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Per example, claim 7 recites:
“means for transmitting communication registration data to the remote connecting unit for registering the secure transaction unit at the remote connecting unit”,
“means for transmitting a request for initiating a connection between the secure transaction unit and the other secure transaction unit via a direct communication channel to the remote connecting unit”,
“means for receiving information from the remote connecting unit for establishing the direct communication channel to the other secure transaction unit”.
Registering the secure transaction unit (e.g.: “secure wallet”, see spec. as filed para. 12 and para. 13 “Secure transaction units may be software-based or hardware-based”) with a remote connecting unit (e.g.: “a rendezvous-server”, see spec. para. 18), initiating and establishing a direct communication channel between the secure transaction unit and the other secure transaction unit by the remote connecting unit integrates the abstract idea into a practical application because of the registration of the secure transaction unit and establishing of the direction communication channel between the transaction units due to the registration.
Claim Interpretation – 35 USC 112(f)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“A secure transaction unit for” (e.g.: “transmitting”, “establishing”)” in claims 7-13,
“the remote connecting unit for” (e.g.: “registering”, “establishing”) in claims 7-13.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 7-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Means Plus Function
Claim 7 recites “An electronic payment transaction system comprising: one or more secure transaction units comprising: means for transmitting communication registration data to a remote connecting unit …; … means for receiving …; … means for providing …”. The specification as filed describes the secure transaction unit in para. 12 as a “secure wallet” and in para. 13 “Secure transaction units may be software-based or hardware-based”. The spec. describes the remote connecting unit in para. 18 as “a rendezvous-server”. However, the spec. is silent on what the “means” is. The specification does not clarify whether the “means” is the secure transaction unit and/or a component (e.g.: a processor, a receiver, a transceiver, a network component) and/or another structure. As such, one of ordinary skill would not know what the “means” is due to the Applicant’s lack of definition in the specification. Therefore, the Applicant does not disclose structure, material or acts to the claimed function. This is also true for claims 10 and 12.
Dependent claims 8-9, 11 and 13-14 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being dependent on rejected parent claims 7 and 10.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 7-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20130060708 A1 (Oskolkov).
As to claim 7,
Oskolkov teaches,
A secure transaction unit (FIG. 1, item 102, para. 48 “a first communication device”) for transmitting transactions to another secure transaction unit (FIG. 1, item 104, para. 48 “a second communication device”) in an electronic payment transaction system (FIG. 1, item 100, para. 48 “an example system”), the secure transaction unit (FIG. 1, item 102, para. 48) comprises:
means for receiving a request for transaction from the other secure transaction receipt unit via a second communication channel (para. 73 “the first communication device 102 in system 100, can utilize the MTS 108 and associated TMC 106 to request users, including users (e.g., second user) who are not registered with the TMC 106, to make a payment or fund transfer”), wherein the request for transaction comprises an identification information (para. 73 “The fund request can specify … information identifying the fund requestor”);
means for transmitting communication registration data to the remote connecting unit (FIG. 1, items 106, 108, para. 49 “a transfer management component (TMC) 106 … a Money Transfer Service (MTS) … 108”) for registering the secure transaction unit at the remote connecting unit (para. 52 “register the first user … registration process”);
means for transmitting a request for initiating a connection between the secure transaction unit and the other secure transaction unit (para. 73 “the first communication device 102 in system 100, can utilize the MTS 108 and associated TMC 106 to request users, including users (e.g., second user) who are not registered with the TMC 106, to make a payment or fund transfer to the entity via the TMC 106”) via a direct communication channel to the remote connecting unit (para. 73 “The entity can use the first communication device 102, and/or the web or mobile MTS application, to generate the request for funds”);
means for receiving information from the remote connecting unit for establishing the direct communication channel to the other secure transaction unit (para. 79 “The fund transfer request or notification, comprising the secure token, can be transmitted by the second communication device 104 to the TMC 106 or directly to the communication address of the fund requestor.”);
means for providing transaction to the other secure transaction unit via the direct communication channel (para. 79-80, para. 82 “submit a payment”).
As to claim 8, Oskolkov teaches all the limitations of claim 7.
Oskolkov teaches,
wherein the communication registration data being transmitted by the secure transaction unit to the remote connecting unit (para. 52) comprises an address, preferably an IP-address (para. 52, 143 “IP address”) and/or identification information identifying the secure transaction unit (para. 52 “communication device identifier (e.g., Media Access Control (MAC) address)”) and/or wherein the received information from the remote connecting unit includes a communication address of the other secure token transaction unit (para. 52 “communication device identifier (e.g., Media Access Control (MAC) address)”).
As to claim 9, Oskolkov teaches all the limitations of claim 7.
Oskolkov teaches,
wherein the request for initiating a connection comprises at least one or more of: identification information identifying the secure transaction unit (para. 52), preferably a unique transaction unit identifier, a name, a pseudonym and/or a key pair including a private and a public key; and/or information about the transaction, preferably a monetary value of the transaction to be received by the secure transaction unit ; a transaction identifier; a signed unique transaction identifier; and/or the public key of the identification information identifying the secure transaction receipt unit; and/or a channel identifier of the direct communication channel (para. 140 “the TMC can generate the code or key and secure the secure token using the code or key (e.g., to lock the secure token and/or encrypt the data contained in the secure token). The intended recipient, using the second communication device, can select the secure token, and the secure token can request that a proper code or key be entered in order to unlock the secure token (and transferred funds therein) and/or decrypt the data, including data relating to the transferred funds, contained in the secure token. The secure token can be unlocked and/or its data decrypted, when the proper code or key is entered, and the funds can be available on the second communication device for use by the intended recipient.”).
As to claim 10, Oskolkov teaches all the limitations of claim 8.
Oskolkov teaches,
An electronic payment transaction system (FIG. 1, item 100, para. 48) comprising:
one or more secure transaction units (FIG. 1, item 102, para. 48) comprising:
means for transmitting communication registration data to a remote connecting unit for registering the secure transaction unit at the remote connecting unit via a first communication channel (FIG. 1, items 106, 108, para. 49, para. 52);
means for transmitting a request for transaction to the other secure transaction unit via a second communication channel, wherein the request for transaction comprises identification information (para. 73);
means for receiving information from the remote connecting unit for establishing a direct communication channel to the other secure transaction unit (para. 79);
means for receiving a transaction from the other transaction unit via the direct communication channel (para. 78-79, 82);
one or more other secure transaction units (FIG. 1, item 104, para. 48) according to claim 8;
one or more remote connecting units (FIG. 1, items 106, 108, para. 49), wherein each of the remote connecting units (FIG. 1, items 106, 108, para. 49) comprise:
means for receiving communication registration data from the secure transaction unit (para. 49, 52);
means for receiving communication registration data from the other secure transaction unit (para. 49, 52);
means for receiving a request for initiating a connection between the other secure transaction unit and the other secure transaction unit (para. 73);
means for providing information of the secure transaction unit to the other se-cure transaction unit and for providing information of the other secure transaction unit to the secure transaction unit for establishing a direct communication channel between the secure transaction unit and the other secure transaction unit (para. 79-80, 82).
As to claim 11, Oskolkov teaches all the limitations of claims 7 and 10.
Oskolkov teaches,
wherein the one or more remote connecting units comprise a rendezvous-server, and/or when comprising more than one remote connecting units, the request for transaction further comprises a communication address, preferably IP-address, of one remote connecting unit selected from the remote connecting units, and/or wherein the communication address of the remote connecting unit is fix or variable (para. 52).
As to claim 12, Oskolkov teaches all the limitations of claim 7.
Oskolkov teaches,
providing a transaction between another secure transaction unit (FIG. 1, item 104, para. 48), according to claim 7, to a secure transaction unit (para. 79-80, 82), in an electronic payment transaction system (FIG. 1, item 100, para. 48), the secure transaction unit (FIG. 1, item 102, para. 48) includes
means for transmitting communication registration data to a remote connecting unit (para. 49) for registering the secure transaction unit at the remote connecting unit via a first communication channel (para. 52);
means for transmitting a request for transaction to the other secure transaction unit via a second communication channel (para. 73), wherein the request for transaction comprises identification information (para. 73);
means for receiving information from the remote connecting unit for establishing a direct communication channel to the other secure transaction unit (para. 79);
means for receiving a transaction from the other transaction unit via the direct communication channel (para. 79-80, 82);
the method comprises:
providing communication registration data from the secure transaction unit to the remote connecting unit for registering the secure transaction unit at the remote connecting unit via a first communication channel (para. 52);
providing a request for transaction from the secure transaction unit to the other se-cure transaction unit via a second communication channel (para. 73), wherein the request for transaction comprises an identification information (para. 73);
when the other secure transaction unit received the request for transaction from a secure transaction unit (para. 73), providing communication registration data from the other secure transaction unit to the remote connecting unit for registering the other secure transaction unit at the remote connecting unit (para. 52) and providing a request for initiating a connection via a direct communication channel between the other secure transaction unit and the secure transaction unit from the other secure transaction unit to the remote connecting unit (para. 73);
providing information of the secure transaction unit to the other secure transaction unit by the remote connecting unit (para. 79);
providing information of the other secure transaction unit to the secure transaction unit by the remote connecting unit (para. 79);
establishing a direct communication channel between the secure transaction unit and the other secure transaction unit based on the provided information by the remote connecting unit (para. 73, 79); and
performing a transaction from the other secure transaction unit to the secure trans-action unit via the established direct communication channel (para. 79-80, 82).
As to claim 13, Oskolkov teaches all the limitations of claims 7 and 12.
Oskolkov teaches,
when the remote connecting unit comprises more than one remote connecting unit (FIG. 1, items 106, 108, para. 49), selecting one remote connecting unit of the remote connecting units by the secure transaction unit (para. 40 “the sender can use the first communication device to generate a fund transfer request and can transmit the fund transfer request to the TMC”), transmitting the communication registration data of the secure transaction unit to the selected remote connecting unit (para. 52), and providing a communication address of the selected remote connecting unit to the other secure transaction unit with the request for transaction (para. 52); and/or
providing the request for transaction as a QR-code, barcode, or figure (para. 53 “submitting a digital image”), and/or
when a loss of the direct communication channel is identified by the secure transaction unit (para. 89 “indirect communication”) and/or the other secure transaction unit (FIG. 1, item 104, para. 48), providing again the request for initiating a connection from the other secure transaction unit to the remote connecting unit (para. 73); providing again information of the secure transaction unit to the other secure transaction unit by the remote connecting unit (para. 79);
providing again information of the other secure transaction unit to the secure transaction unit by the remote connecting unit (para. 79);
establishing again the direct communication channel between the secure transaction unit and the other secure transaction unit based on the provided information by the remote connecting unit (para. 73, 79); and
providing again the transaction from the other secure transaction unit to the secure transaction unit via the direct communication channel (para. 79-80, 82).
As to claim 14, Oskolkov teaches all the limitations of claims 7 and 12.
Oskolkov teaches,
verifying the established direct communication channel (para. 10 “confirm or validate”, para. 124 “a confirm control 532 that can be used to confirm the information in the fund transfer request and/or transmit the fund transfer request”).
Conclusion
Reference made of record, not relied upon, pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure, includes US 11080685 B1 (Maeng) disclosing direct payment authorization path.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BROCK E TURK whose telephone number is (571)272-5626. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-5PM 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, Ryan Donlon can be reached at 571-270-3602. 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.
/BROCK E TURK/Examiner, Art Unit 3692
/RYAN D DONLON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3692 February 10, 2026