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 office action is in response to the claim amendments filed on February 09, 2026.
Claims 2-21 are pending.
Claim 1 has been canceled.
Claims 2-21 have been examined.
Response to Arguments
With respect to Claim Rejections - Double Patenting
The Examiner will continue examination on the merits and maintain the double patenting rejection. If the claims are eventually found to be allowable, a Terminal Disclaimer (TD) will be required to overcome the double patenting rejection.
With respect to Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
Applicant argues: Applicant further argues that, the claims are not directed to an abstract idea, but rather to a specific technical improvement in the security and efficiency of mobile device credentialing. Under the USPTO's 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, the claims are patent- eligible because they are integrated into a practical application that provides more than a generic "organizing" of activity.
The claimed invention requires a specific, multi-layered hardware and software handshake that cannot be performed through a general process of organizing human activity. Specifically, the claims require presenting a "one-tap authentication option" on a GUI, receiving an encrypted message directly from a physical contactless card via wireless communication, and sending that message to a remote first-party entity. This process is not a mere commercial interaction; it is a specialized technical protocol for secure provisioning. By binding the authentication to a physical contactless card and a specific, encrypted wireless handshake, the claims provide a technological solution to the problem of fraud and data interception in digital wallet setup. See Applicant’s arguments pages 8-9.
The Examiner, however, respectfully disagrees. As a preliminary matter, the Examiner follows the 2019 Patent Eligibility Guidance (“2019 PEG”) which is a synthesis of the case law of Alice and its progeny. Additionally, the reasoning for this rejection is the same as was laid out in the Office Action Non-Final Rejection, dated 11/07/2025 (hereinafter, “Office Action”). The Claims are not directed to any improvement in computer technology. Claims are directed to presenting a option, receiving a message, sending the message and transition between applications. Applicant must take into consideration that in order to view the claims as supplying an inventive concept the technological improvement must be present within the claims themselves (Accenture Global Servs., GmbH v. Guidewire Software, inc., 108 USPQ2d 1173 (Fed. Cir. 2013)), (Synopsys, inc. v. Mentor Graphics Corp... 120 USPQ2d 1473 (Fed. Cir. 2016). Thus, as indicated on the Office Action, the claims describe the abstract idea of authenticating data to link a contactless card to a digital wallet and categorized as a part of organizing human activity.
Applicant argues, the claims recite a technical nexus where the transition to the third- party wallet application is functionally triggered only after a successful authentication based on the hardware-originated message. The transition itself includes "sending information for the contactless card to the third-party wallet application," which automates a secure data handoff between distinct application environments. This automation is not a mere shortcut for a human actor but a systematic integration of two separate software systems facilitated by a physical hardware token (the contactless card). This configuration imposes meaningful limits on the use of the abstract idea, ensuring that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort to monopolize a judicial exception. See Applicant’s arguments page 9.
The Examiner however, respectfully disagrees, the claims also fail to recite a practical application of the abstract ideas. According to the 2019 PEG, the additional claim elements are considered when determining whether the claim recites a practical application, such as a technological improvement, of the abstract idea. Therefore, this analysis is the same as the analysis laid out in the Office Action.
The claims also fail to recite significantly more than the abstract idea. According to the 2019 PEG, the additional elements, when considered individually and as a combination, are analyzed to determine whether the claims recite significantly more than the abstract idea. As noted on the Office Action, the additional elements serve to implement the abstract idea in a computing environment.
Furthermore, the recited claims, for example, “receiving, by the first software application, a message comprising encrypted data via a wireless communication from the contactless card” it is just receiving encrypted data and it do not appear that, it would result in any improvement to the recited technology. Therefore, the claim limitations do not include additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or that provide significantly more than the abstract idea. Accordingly, this ground of rejection is maintained.
With respect to Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Applicant argues: The Office Action has rejected claims 2-5, 8-10, 12-14, and 16-20 as being obvious over Sims in view of Yang and Lim. While Sims discloses general NFC reading of a card, the Office Action admits that Sims "does not specifically disclose" initiating a transition to a third-party wallet application that includes sending card information. To address this deficiency, the Office Action relies on Yang for the concept of switching interfaces. Applicant respectfully traverses this rejection, as the combination fails to teach the specific, secure data-linked transition claimed.
The "transition" recited in the pending claims is not a generic UI switch for user convenience, as described in Yang. Instead, it is a secure data handoff that is functionally dependent on the successful authentication of a physical contactless card. Yang describes avoiding "complex operation[s] of manually selecting" an application, but lacks any teaching regarding the secure transmission of sensitive card information during that transition to facilitate adding or linking a card to a third-party environment. A Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art (POSITA) would not be motivated to combine the hardware- reading capabilities of Sims with the generic navigation of Yang to arrive at the claimed invention without the benefit of impermissible hindsight. See Applicant’s arguments pages 10-11.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 2 has been considered. The Examiner, however, respectfully disagrees.
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
In this case, as indicated on the Office Action, Sims discloses, presenting, loading and communicating credential information and/or transaction data between plurality of entities (e.g., payment device, merchant, financial institution, tokenization service and digital wallet), (i.e., communicating transaction data between the first-party banking application and the third-party wallet application).
Sims does not specifically disclose, a transition to the third-party wallet application and the transition to include sending data (e.g., confirmation/message).
However, Dongqi YANG discloses, initiate, by the first-party banking application, a transition to the third-party wallet application and the transition to include sending data (Dongqi YANG [0383], “The terminal may directly switch from the interface of the first application to an interface of the second application according to an instruction received on the prompt information. In this way, when browsing the interface of the first application, the user may directly enter the interface of the second application by triggering an operation on the prompt information on the interface of the first application, thereby avoiding a complex operation of manually selecting, by the user, the second application from a large quantity of applications installed on the terminal, and also avoiding an operation of manually starting the second application by the user”), (see paragraphs [0003], [0069]-[0070], [0231] and [0383] and Figs. 8A, 8B and 9A and 9B).
Additionally, in response to Applicant’s arguments, that the "transition" recited in the pending claims is not a generic UI switch for user convenience. Instead, it is a secure data handoff that is functionally dependent on the successful authentication of a physical contactless card. Yang describes avoiding "complex operation[s] of manually selecting" an application, but lacks any teaching regarding the secure transmission of sensitive card information during that transition to facilitate adding or linking a card to a third-party environment.
The Examiner, however, respectfully disagrees. As cited on the Office Action, the Examiner relied on Sims to disclose, receiving, by the first software application, a message comprising [contactless credential information comprising cryptograms] via a wireless communication from the contactless card and receiving, by the first software application, an indication from the one or more remote computing devices of a successful authentication.
The Examiner relied on Dongqi YANG to specifically disclose, a transition to the third-party wallet application and the transition to include sending data with data. Dongqi YANG is cited to teach specific technical feature of transiting/directing/re-directing/forwarding from one application to another application including a data.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sims with Dongqi YANG to include a well-known feature such re-directing/switching/transition between user first interface to user second interface to enhance user experience and to communicate data between plurality of entities.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 2-21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,112,310 (hereinafter, “Patent Document”). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
This Application
Patent Document
Claim 9, 2 and 17: An apparatus, comprising: a display device; one or more processors coupled with the display device; memory coupled with the display device and the one or more processors, the memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, causes the one or more processors to:
[…]
[…]
[…]
present, by a first software application in a first-display graphical user interface (GUI) on the display device, a one-tap authentication option for a user to tap a contactless card on or near the display device for adding or linking the contactless card to a third-party wallet application;
[…]
receive, by the first software application, a message comprising encrypted data via a wireless communication from the contactless card;
send, by the first software application, at least a portion of the message to one or more remote computing devices associated with a first-party entity;
receive, by the first software application, an indication from the one or more remote computing devices of a successful authentication based on the portion of the message; and
initiate, by the first software application, a transition to the third-party wallet application based on a successful authentication, the transition to include sending information for the contactless card to the third-party wallet application to add or link to the third-party wallet application.
Claim 1: An apparatus, comprising: a display device; one or more processors coupled with the display device; memory coupled with the display device and the one or more processors, the memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, causes the one or more processors to:
provide access to a first-party banking application in response to authentication of user login information;
present, by the first-party banking application in a first-display graphical user interface (GUI) on the display device, an indication to add or link a payment card associated with a user and the account to a third-party wallet application;
receive, by the first-party banking application, a selection of the indication;
present, by the first-party banking application in the first-display GUI on the display device, a one-tap authentication option for the user to tap a contactless card on or near the apparatus, and wherein the contactless card is the payment card to add or link to the third-party wallet application;
establish a first wireless communication with the contactless card;
receive a message comprising encrypted data and a random number via the first wireless communication from the contactless card, [wherein the contactless card generates the message by encrypting the encrypted data and the random number with a session key, wherein the encrypted data comprises a unique identifier associated with the contactless card];
send, by the first-party banking application, at least a portion of the message to one or more remote computing devices associated with a first-party entity;
receive, by the first-party banking application, a second indication from the one or more remote computing devices of a successful authentication based on the portion of the message; and
initiate, by the first-party banking application, a transition to the third-party wallet application, the transition to include sending information for the payment card to the third-party wallet application to add or link to the third-party wallet application, [the transition to further include causing the third-party wallet application to display at least confirmation that the payment card has been successfully added or linked to the third-party wallet application in a second-display GUI on the display device].
Claim 3: The computer-implemented method of claim 2, wherein the transition to the third-party wallet application further includes causing the third-party wallet application to display at least confirmation that the contactless card has been successfully added or linked to the third-party wallet application in a second-display GUI on the display device.
Claim 1:
the transition to further include causing the third-party wallet application to display at least confirmation that the payment card has been successfully added or linked to the third-party wallet application in a second-display GUI on the display device
Claim 4: The computer-implemented method of claim 2, further comprising: receiving, by the first software application, user login information; and authenticating, via the first software application, the user login information.
Claim 3: The apparatus of claim 1, the one or more processors to: receive user login information; and authenticate, via the first-party banking application, the user login information.
Claim 5: The computer-implemented method of claim 2, wherein the first software application is a mobile-based application, a native application, a web application, or a web browser and wherein the third-party wallet application is a mobile-based application, a native application, a web application, or a web browser.
Claim 4: The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the first-party banking application is a mobile-based application, a native application, a web application, or a web browser and wherein the third-party wallet application is a mobile-based application, a native application, a web application, or a web browser.
Claim 6: The computer-implemented method of claim 2, wherein the contactless card comprises memory and processing circuitry for executing instructions stored in the memory to generate the encrypted data, determine the random number, and send the message.
Claim 6: The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the contactless card comprises memory and processing circuitry for executing instructions stored in the memory to generate the encrypted data, determine the random number, and send the message.
Claim 7: The computer-implemented method of claim 2, further comprising receiving, from the user, permission to share data with the third-party wallet application.
Claim 2: The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the instructions further cause the one or more processors to receive, from the user, permission to share data with the third-party wallet application.
Claim 8: The computer-implemented method of claim 2, wherein the first software application receives the message in one or more NFC data exchange format (NDEF) messages.
Claim 5: The apparatus of claim 1, the one or more processors to receive the message in one or more NFC data exchange format (NDEF) messages.
Dependent claims 10-16 and 18-21 recite subject matter similar to that discussed above in connection with dependent claims 3-8. Accordingly, claims 10-16 and 18-21 are rejected under a similar rationale as claims 3-8.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify claim 1 of the Patent Document by removing the additional limitations, resulting generally in the claims of this application, since the claims of this application and the claim recited in the Patent Document actually perform a similar function. It is well settled that the omission of an element and its function is an obvious expedient if the remaining elements perform the same function as before. In re Karison, 136 USPQ 184 (CCPA 1963). Also note Ex parte Rainu, 168 USPQ 375 (Bd. App. 1969). Thus, omission of a reference element whose function is not needed would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
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 2-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
In the instant case, claims 2-8 are directed to a method, claims 17-21 are directed to a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, and claims 9-16 are directed to An apparatus comprising a memory and a processor. Therefore, these claims fall within the four statutory categories of invention.
The claims recite an abstract idea of authenticating data to link a contactless card to a digital wallet. Specifically, the claims recite “presenting, by a first software application in a first-display graphical user interface (GUI) on …, a one-tap authentication option for a user to tap a … on or near the … for adding or linking the … to a third-party wallet application; receiving, by the first software application, a message comprising encrypted data via a wireless communication from the …; sending, by the first software application, at least a portion of the message to one or more remote computing … associated with a first-party entity; receiving, by the first software application, an indication from the one or more remote computing … of a successful authentication based on the portion of the message; and initiating, by the first software application, a transition to the third-party wallet application, the transition to include sending information for the … to the third-party wallet application to add or link to the third-party wallet application”, which is grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas in prong one of step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test (See MPEP 2106.04(a)) because it describes a process for carrying out a commercial interaction between parties that involves communicating data needed to link a contactless credit card to a digital wallet. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea (See MPEP 2106.04).
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because, when analyzed under prong two of step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test (See MPEP 2106.04(a or d)), the additional element(s) of the claim(s) such as a memory and processor merely use(s) a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. Specifically, the memory and processor perform(s) the steps or functions of “presenting, by a first software application in a first-display graphical user interface (GUI) on a display device, a one-tap authentication option for a user to tap a contactless card on or near the display device for adding or linking the contactless card to a third-party wallet application; receiving, by the first software application, a message comprising encrypted data via a wireless communication from the contactless card; sending, by the first software application, at least a portion of the message to one or more remote computing devices associated with a first-party entity; receiving, by the first software application, an indication from the one or more remote computing devices of a successful authentication based on the portion of the message; and initiating, by the first software application, a transition to the third-party wallet application, the transition to include sending information for the contactless card to the third-party wallet application to add or link to the third-party wallet application.” The use of a processor/computer as a tool to implement the abstract idea does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it requires no more than a computer performing functions that correspond to acts required to carry out the abstract idea. The additional elements do not involve improvements to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field (See MPEP 2106.05(a)), the claims do not apply the abstract idea with, or by use of, a particular machine (See MPEP 2106.05(b)), the claims do not effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing (See MPEP 2106.05(c)), and the claims do not apply or use the abstract idea in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the abstract idea 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) and Vanda Memo). Therefore, the claims do not, for example, purport to improve the functioning of a computer. Nor do they effect an improvement in any other technology or technical field. Accordingly, the additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and the claims are directed to an abstract idea.
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because, when analyzed under step 2B of the Alice/Mayo test (See MPEP 2106.05), the additional element(s) of using a memory and processor to perform the steps amounts to no more than using a computer or processor to automate and/or implement the abstract idea of authenticating data to link a contactless card to a digital wallet. As discussed above, taking the claim elements separately, the memory and processor perform(s) the steps or functions of “presenting, by a first software application in a first-display graphical user interface (GUI) on a display device, a one-tap authentication option for a user to tap a contactless card on or near the display device for adding or linking the contactless card to a third-party wallet application; receiving, by the first software application, a message comprising encrypted data via a wireless communication from the contactless card; sending, by the first software application, at least a portion of the message to one or more remote computing devices associated with a first-party entity; receiving, by the first software application, an indication from the one or more remote computing devices of a successful authentication based on the portion of the message; and initiating, by the first software application, a transition to the third-party wallet application, the transition to include sending information for the contactless card to the third-party wallet application to add or link to the third-party wallet application.” These functions correspond to the actions required to perform the abstract idea. Viewed as a whole, the combination of elements recited in the claims merely recite the concept of authenticating data to link a contactless card to a digital wallet. Therefore, the use of these additional elements does no more than employ the computer as a tool to automate and/or implement the abstract idea. The use of a computer or processor to merely automate and/or implement the abstract idea cannot provide significantly more than the abstract idea itself (MPEP 2106.05(I)(A)(f) & (h)). Therefore, the claim is not patent eligible.
Regarding dependent claims
Claims 3, 12 and 18 recite: wherein the transition to the third-party wallet application further includes causing the third-party wallet application to display at least confirmation that the contactless card has been successfully added or linked to the third-party wallet application in a second-display GUI on the display device.
Claims 4, 13 and 19 recite: receiving, by the first software application, user login information; and authenticating, via the first software application, the user login information.
Claims 5, 14 and 20 recite: wherein the first software application is a mobile-based application, a native application, a web application, or a web browser and wherein the third-party wallet application is a mobile-based application, a native application, a web application, or a web browser.
Claim 6 recites: wherein the contactless card comprises memory and processing circuitry for executing instructions stored in the memory to generate the encrypted data, determine the random number, and send the message.
Claims 7 and 15 recite: receiving, from the user, permission to share data with the third-party wallet application.
Claims 8 and 16 recite: wherein the first software application receives the message in one or more NFC data exchange format (NDEF) messages.
Claim 10 recites: wherein the instructions further cause the one or more processors, prior to initiating the transition, to receive, by the first software application, an indication from the one or more remote computing devices of the successful authentication based on the portion of the message.
Claim 11 recites: wherein the instructions further cause the one or more processors to present in the first-display GUI confirmation of the successful authentication.
Claim 21 recites: wherein the instructions further cause the computer, prior to initiating the transition, to receive, from the user, permission to share data with the third-party wallet application, wherein the computer initiates the transition based on receiving the permission.
Dependent claims further describe the abstract idea of authenticating data to link a contactless card to a digital wallet. The dependent claims do not include additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or that provide significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the dependent claims are also not patent eligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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 2-5, 8-10, 12-14 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sims et al. (US 20180211248 A1, “Sims”) in view of Dongqi YANG (US 20210149693 A1, “Dongqi YANG”) further in view of Lim et al. (US 20140074655 A1, “Lim”).
Regarding claims 2, 9 and 17: Sims discloses: A computer-implemented method, comprising:
presenting, by a first software application in a first-display graphical user interface (GUI) (e.g., a mobile application) on a display device, a one-tap authentication option for a user to tap a contactless card on or near the display device for adding or linking the contactless card to a third-party wallet application (Sims [0086]: The user taps his or her NFC enabled mobile device and the system reads the card, including reading the card number, expiration date and cryptogram; [0088]: Next, as represented by block 530, the mobile device receives, from a contactless reader, contactless credential information); (see paragraphs [0088], [0086] and [0002], [0030] and Fig. 5 and related text);
receiving, by the first software application, a message comprising [contactless credential information comprising cryptograms] via a wireless communication from the contactless card (Sims [0086]: The user taps his or her NFC enabled mobile device and the system reads the card, including reading the card number, expiration date and cryptogram); (see paragraphs [0030], [0086] and [0067] and Figs. 5 and 4 and related text);
sending, by the first software application, at least a portion of the [contactless credential information comprising cryptograms] to one or more remote computing devices associated with a first-party entity (Sims [0086]: In some cases, this step-up authentication may include running of an OTP or CVV widget. Embodiments of the invention enable use of a contactless plastic card by a customer having an NFC-enabled device to setup digital wallets. The user taps his or her NFC enabled mobile device and the system reads the card, including reading the card number, expiration date and cryptogram. The system then verifies the contactless data against internal authorization protocols. The system also validates the card belongs to the user, such as by confirming the user identity of the card matches the user identity of the online banking session or mobile application); (See paragraphs [0086] and [0089] and Figs. 4 and 5 and related text);
receiving, by the first software application, an indication from the one or more remote computing devices of a successful authentication based on the portion of the [contactless credential information comprising cryptograms] (Sims [0089]: the mobile device and/or institution system compares the accessed user identity information with the contactless credential owner identification. …in response to successful comparison and/or successful completion of the EMV transaction using the digital wallet, load the contactless credential information into the digital wallet and/or enable use of the payment token corresponding to the contactless credential information in a transaction. In response to an unsuccessful comparison, embodiments may prevent the loading or enabling of step 640), (see paragraphs [0088], [0089], [0030] and [0086] and Fig. 6 and related text); and
initiating, by the first software application, a [communication to the third-party wallet application, the communication to include] sending information for the contactless card to the third-party wallet application to add or link to the third-party wallet application (Sims [0011]: “comparing the accessed user identity information with the contactless credential owner identification; and, in response to successful comparison, loading the contactless credential information into the digital wallet), (see paragraphs [0003], [0011] and [0088] and Fig. 5).
As indicated above, Sims discloses, presenting, loading and communicating credential information and/or transaction data between plurality of entities (e.g., payment device, merchant, financial institution, tokenization service and digital wallet), (i.e., communicating transaction data between the first-party banking application and the third-party wallet application).
Sims does not specifically disclose, initiate, by the first-party banking application, a transition to the third-party wallet application and the transition to include sending data (e.g., confirmation/message).
However, Dongqi YANG discloses, initiate, by the first-party banking application, a transition to the third-party wallet application and the transition to include sending data (Dongqi YANG [0383], “The terminal may directly switch from the interface of the first application to an interface of the second application according to an instruction received on the prompt information. In this way, when browsing the interface of the first application, the user may directly enter the interface of the second application by triggering an operation on the prompt information on the interface of the first application, thereby avoiding a complex operation of manually selecting, by the user, the second application from a large quantity of applications installed on the terminal, and also avoiding an operation of manually starting the second application by the user”), (see paragraphs [0003], [0069]-[0070], [0231] and [0383] and Figs. 8A, 8B and 9A and 9B).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sims with Dongqi YANG to include a well-known feature such re-directing/switching/transition between user first interface to user second interface to enhance user experience and to communicate data between plurality of entities.
Sims does not specifically disclose, display at least confirmation that the payment card has been successfully added or linked to the third-party wallet application.
However, Lim discloses:
the third-party wallet application to display at least confirmation that the payment card has been successfully added or linked to the third-party wallet application (Lim [0035]: In some implementations, the wallet server then transmits 522 an "account successfully added" message to the consumer device); (see paragraphs [0035] and Fig. 5 and related text).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of combination of Sims and Dongqi YANG with Lim to include a well-known function such as displaying a confirmation message to a user to enhance user experience.
Regarding claims 3, 12 and 18: Sims, Dongqi YANG and Lim, discloses the limitations of claim 1 above.
Sims further discloses: The computer-implemented method of claim 2, wherein [communication to the third-party wallet application] further includes causing the third-party wallet application to [confirming/notification] that the contactless card has been successfully added or linked to the third-party wallet application in a second-display GUI on the display device (Sims [0089]: load the contactless credential information into the digital wallet and/or enable use of the payment token corresponding to the contactless credential information in a transaction); (see paragraphs [0011], [0026] and [0089] and Fig. 6 and related text).
Examiner’s Note: The Examiner considers (Sims [0089]: load the contactless credential information into the digital wallet and/or enable use of the payment token corresponding to the contactless credential information in a transaction) to be the at least confirmation that the payment card has been successfully added or linked to the third-party wallet application.
Sims does not specifically disclose, initiate, by the first-party banking application, a transition to the third-party wallet application and the transition to include sending data (e.g., confirmation/message).
However, Dongqi YANG discloses, initiate, by the first-party banking application, a transition to the third-party wallet application and the transition to include sending data (Dongqi YANG [0383], “The terminal may directly switch from the interface of the first application to an interface of the second application according to an instruction received on the prompt information. In this way, when browsing the interface of the first application, the user may directly enter the interface of the second application by triggering an operation on the prompt information on the interface of the first application, thereby avoiding a complex operation of manually selecting, by the user, the second application from a large quantity of applications installed on the terminal, and also avoiding an operation of manually starting the second application by the user”), (see paragraphs [0003], [0069]-[0070], [0231] and [0383] and Figs. 8A, 8B and 9A and 9B).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sims with Dongqi YANG to include a well-known feature such re-directing/switching/transition between user first interface to user second interface to enhance user experience and to communicate data between plurality of entities.
Sims does not specifically disclose, display at least confirmation that the payment card has been successfully added or linked to the third-party wallet application.
However, Lim discloses:
the third-party wallet application to display at least confirmation that the payment card has been successfully added or linked to the third-party wallet application (Lim [0035]: In some implementations, the wallet server then transmits 522 an "account successfully added" message to the consumer device); (see paragraphs [0035] and Fig. 5 and related text).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of combination of Sims and Dongqi YANG with Lim to include a well-known function such as displaying a confirmation message to a user to enhance user experience.
Regarding claims 4, 13 and 19: Sims, Dongqi YANG and Lim, discloses the limitations of claim 1 above.
Sims further discloses: The computer-implemented method of claim 2, further comprising:
receiving, by the first software application, user login information (Sims [0087]: The first step, as represented by block 510, is to receive and validate user authentication credentials); (See paragraph [0087] and Fig. 5 and related text); and
authenticating, via the first software application, the user login information (Sims [0087]: The first step, as represented by block 510, is to receive and validate user authentication credentials); (See paragraph [0087] and Fig. 5 and related text).
Regarding claims 5, 14 and 20: Sims, Dongqi YANG and Lim, discloses the limitations of claim 1 above.
Sims further discloses: The computer-implemented method of claim 2, wherein the first software application is a mobile-based application, a native application, a web application, or a web browser and wherein the third-party wallet application is a mobile-based application, a native application, a web application, or a web browser (Sims [0002]: in response to validation, enabling access to one or more features or functions of a mobile application); (see paragraphs [0002], [0030] and [0086] and Fig. 1 and related text).
Regarding claims 8 and 16: Sims, Dongqi YANG and Lim, discloses the limitations of claim 1 above.
Sims further discloses: The computer-implemented method of claim 2, wherein the first software application receives the message in one or more NFC data exchange format (NDEF) messages (Sims [0088]: the mobile device receives, from a contactless reader, contactless credential information. The contactless reader may be configured to read and/or communicate wirelessly with a contactless chip or other communication device of a payment credential (such as a payment card enabled with an NFC chip)); (see paragraphs [0088], [0073] and [0030] and Fig. 4 and Fig. 5 and related text).
Regarding claim 10: Sims, Dongqi YANG and Lim, discloses the limitations of claim 1 above.
Sims further discloses: The apparatus of claim 9, wherein the instructions further cause the one or more processors, prior to initiating the [transaction], to receive, by the first software application, an indication from the one or more remote computing devices of the successful authentication based on the portion of the message (see paragraphs [0088], [0089], [0030] and [0086] and Fig. 6 and related text).
As indicated above, Sims discloses, presenting, loading and communicating credential information and/or transaction data between plurality of entities (e.g., payment device, merchant, financial institution, tokenization service and digital wallet), (i.e., communicating transaction data between the first-party banking application and the third-party wallet application).
Sims does not specifically disclose, initiate, by the first-party banking application, a transition to the third-party wallet application and the transition to include sending data (e.g., confirmation/message).
However, Dongqi YANG discloses, initiate, by the first-party banking application, a transition to the third-party wallet application and the transition to include sending data (see paragraphs [0003], [0069]-[0070], [0231] and [0383] and Figs. 8A, 8B and 9A and 9B).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sims with Dongqi YANG to include a well-known feature such re-directing/switching/transition between user first interface to user second interface to enhance user experience and to communicate data between plurality of entities.
Regarding claim 11: Sims, Dongqi YANG and Lim, discloses the limitations of claim 1 above.
Sims further discloses: The apparatus of claim 10, wherein the instructions further cause the one or more processors to present in the first-display GUI confirmation of the successful authentication (Sims [0011]: comparing the accessed user identity information with the contactless credential owner identification; and, in response to successful comparison, loading the contactless credential information into the digital wallet), (see paragraphs [0011], and [0026] and Fig. 6 and related text)
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sims et al. (US 20180211248 A1, “Sims”) in view of Dongqi YANG (US 20210149693 A1, “Dongqi YANG”) in view of Lim et al. (US 20140074655 A1, “Lim”) further in view of Kim et. al (US 20180341937 A1, “Kim”).
Regarding claim 6: Sims, Dongqi YANG and Lim, discloses the limitations of claim 1 above.
Sims further discloses: The computer-implemented method of claim 2, wherein the contactless card comprises memory and processing circuitry for executing instructions stored in the memory to generate the [cryptogram, and send the message] (See paragraphs [0086] and [0089] and Figs. 4 and 5 and related text).
Sim does not expressly disclose: determine a random number.
However, Kim discloses:
generate the encrypted data, determine the random number, and send the message (e.g., ID 410 / ID 430) with a session key (Kim [0101]: the token 400 may include a token ID 410, a token expiration time 420, a token requester ID 430, and a cryptogram 440; [0105]: The cryptogram 440 may include information related to the encryption of the token 400, and the token 400 may be encrypted in a variety of ways according to the implementation of an encryption engine 441. For example, the cryptogram 440 may be generated by inputting a key 442 for decrypting the token 400 or data 443 related to encryption into the encryption engine 441; [0079]: the token server 140 may generate or encrypt a token. For example, a token generated or encrypted by the token server 140 may be transmitted to the electronic device 110 without passing through the payment server 130); (see also paragraphs [0063], [0079], [0257]-[0258], [0267], [0273]-[0274] and Fig. 4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Sims and Yang with Kim to include a well-known security feature such as encrypting messages to improve data protection and security to enhance user experience.
Claims 7, 15 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sims et al. (US 20180211248 A1, “Sims”) in view of Dongqi YANG (US 20210149693 A1, “Dongqi YANG”) in view of Lim et al. (US 20140074655 A1, “Lim”) in view of Kim et. al (US 20180341937 A1, “Kim”) further in view of Lanc (US 8423466 B2, “Lanc”).
Regarding claims 7 and 15: Sims, Dongqi YANG and Lim, discloses the limitations of claim 1 above.
Sims does not specifically disclose; however, Lanc discloses: The computer-implemented method of claim 2, further comprising receiving, from the user, permission to share data with the third-party wallet application (see Column 13, LN 59-67 – Column 14, LN 1-11).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Sims, Lim, Yang and Dongqi YANG with Lanc to include a well-known data sharing privacy policy such as requesting user’s consent to share data to enhance user experience.
Regarding claim 21: Sims, Dongqi YANG and Lim, discloses the limitations of claim 1 above.
As indicated above, Sims discloses, presenting and communicating transaction data between plurality of entities (e.g., payment device, merchant, financial institution, tokenization service), (i.e., communicating transaction data between the first-party banking application and the third-party wallet application).
Sims does not specifically disclose: wherein the instructions further cause the computer, prior to initiating the transition, to [receive/send data].
However, Dongqi YANG discloses, The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 17, wherein the instructions further cause the computer, prior to initiating the transition, to receive, from the user [data/ information] (Dongqi YANG [0383]: The terminal may directly switch from the interface of the first application to an interface of the second application according to an instruction received on the prompt information. In this way, when browsing the interface of the first application, the user may directly enter the interface of the second application by triggering an operation on the prompt information on the interface of the first application, thereby avoiding a complex operation of manually selecting, by the user, the second application from a large quantity of applications installed on the terminal, and also avoiding an operation of manually starting the second application by the user), (see paragraphs [0003], [0069]-[0070], [0231] and [0383] and Figs. 8A, 8B and 9A and 9B).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sims with Dongqi YANG to include a well-known feature such re-directing/switching/transition between user first interface to user second interface to enhance user experience and to communicate data between plurality of entities.
Sims does not specifically disclose, however, Lanc discloses: The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 17, wherein the instructions further cause the computer, [prior to initiating the transition, to] receive, from the user, permission to share data with the third-party wallet application, wherein the computer initiates the transition based on receiving the permission (see Column 13, LN 59-67 – Column 14, LN 1-11).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Sims, Lim, Yang and Dongqi YANG with Lanc to include a well-known data sharing privacy policy such as requesting user’s consent to share data to enhance user experience.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAHED ALI whose telephone number is (571)270-1085. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 - 5:00 M-F.
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, Neha Patel can be reached on (571) 270-1492. 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.
/JAHED ALI/Examiner, Art Unit 3699
Prosecution Insights