DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The following is a non-final, first office action on the merits in response to the election filed 12/11/2025.
Applicant’s election of Group 1, Claim 1-10 and cancellation of Claims 11-20 have been received and are acknowledged.
The applicant's claim for benefit of provisional application US 63228979 filed 8/3/2021 and as a DIV of US 17587225 filed 1/28/2022 has been received and acknowledged.
Claims 1-10 are currently pending and have been examined.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
When considering subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. 101, (1) it must be determined whether the claim is directed to one of the four statutory categories of invention, i.e., process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. If the claim does fall within one of the statutory categories, (2a) it must then be determined whether the claim is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., law of nature, natural phenomenon, and abstract idea), and if so (2b), it must additionally be determined whether the claim is a patent-eligible application of the exception. If an abstract idea is present in the claim, any element or combination of elements in the claim must be sufficient to ensure that the claim amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. Examples of abstract ideas include fundamental economic practices; certain methods of organizing human activities; an idea itself; and mathematical relationships/formulas. Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank International, et al., 573 U.S. ____ (2014).
The claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e. a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. In the instant case, the claim(s) as a whole, considering all claim elements both individually and in combination, do not amount to significantly more than an abstract idea.
(1) In the instant case, the claims are directed towards a method and the system of using a virtual account in an online marketplace. In the instant case, Claims 1-9 are directed to a process. Claim 10 is directed to a system.
(2a) Prong 1: Using a virtual account in an online marketplace is categorized in/akin to the abstract idea subject matter grouping of: methods of organizing human activity [organizing human activity (commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations)]. As such, the claims include an abstract idea.
The specific limitations of the invention are (a) identified to encompass the abstract idea include:
(Original) A method comprising:
publishing, by an … marketplace, a first listing for a first item to a plurality of client .., the first item listed by a first user account of the …marketplace;
providing, in connection with a second user account purchasing the first item via the first listing, first monetary compensation to the first user account from the second user account by updating a balance of a …account that corresponds to the first user account to include the first monetary compensation;
publishing, by the … marketplace, a second listing for a second item to a plurality of client …, the second item listed by a third user account of the …marketplace; and
providing, in connection with the first user account purchasing the second item via the second listing, at least a portion of the balance to the third user account directly from the …account as second monetary compensation.
10. (Original) A … comprising:
… to store a plurality of listings for items listed on an … marketplace, the plurality of listings including at least a first listing for a first item and a second listing for a second item, the first item listed by a first user account of the … marketplace and the second item listed by a second user account of the … marketplace; and
…. … …. to cause the at least one server device to:
publish the plurality of listings via the … marketplace;
provide, in connection with a third user account purchasing the first item via the first listing, first monetary compensation to the first user account from the third user account by updating a balance of a … account that corresponds to the first user account to include the first monetary compensation; and
provide, in connection with the first user account purchasing the second item via the second listing, at least a portion of the balance to the second user account directly from the …account as second monetary compensation.
As stated above, this abstract idea falls into the (b) subject matter grouping of: methods of organizing human activity .
Prong 2: When considered individually and in combination, the instant claims are do not integrate the exception into a practical application because the steps of publishing…, providing… publishing…, providing… do not apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that that imposes a meaningful limitation on the judicial exception (i.e. the abstract idea).
The instant recited claims including additional elements (i.e. providing…providing…storing…) do not improve the functioning of the computer or improve another technology or technical field nor do they recite meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The limitations merely recite: “apply it” (or an equivalent) or merely include instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea or merely add insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception o generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (: See MPEP 2106.05 (f) and (g))
(2b) In the instant case, Claims 1-9 are directed to a process. Claims 10-are directed to a system.
Additionally, the claims (independent and dependent) do not include additional elements that individually or in combination are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception of abstract idea (i.e. provide an inventive concept). As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element(s) of: ( virtual… online…storage device… ) merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea or merely add insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception or merely uses generic computing elements to perform well known, routine, and conventional functions. (See MPEP 2106.05 (d) and (f))
(Specification, Fig. 1 and 2, online marketplace)
The dependent claims have also been examined and do not correct the deficiencies of the independent claims.
It is noted that claim (2-9) introduces the additional elements of clauses that further define claim elements/steps ( balance… (Claim 2) … portion of balance.. . (Claims 3 and 6) ….updating the balance…(Claim 4)… the collectible… (Claim 5) …providing… compensation… (Claim 7)…third monetary compensation…. (Claim 8)… limiting an amount of balance… (Claim 9)…..These elements are not a practical application of the judicial exception because these limitations merely recite: “apply it” (or an equivalent) or merely include instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea or merely add insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception or generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (See MPEP 2106.05 (f) and (g)) Further these limitations taken alone or in combination with the abstract do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea alone because, ).the elements amount to merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea or merely add insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception or merely uses generic computing elements to perform well known, routine, and conventional functions. (See MPEP 2106.05 (d) and (f))
(Specification, Fig. 1 and 2, online marketplace)
Therefore, claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Prior Art
The prior art of US 2015/0248663 A1, Meere et al. hereinafter referred to as Meere generally discloses processing payment for an online market place (See also Meere, Fig. 5-7, payment transaction). US 2010/0082480 A1 Korosec hereinafter referred to as Korosec generally discloses payment with virtual value (See also Korosec, Fig. 1 marketplace, payment processor). US 20140351072 A1 Wieler et al. hereinafter referred to as Wieler (Split Tender in Prepaid Architecture) generally discloses stored value account payment element switch feature of payment splitting. Specifically the limitation which is not taught:
publishing, by the online marketplace, a second listing for a second item to a plurality of client devices, the second item listed by a …. user account of the online marketplace; and
providing, in connection with the first user account purchasing the second item via the second listing, at least a portion of the balance to the ….user account directly from the virtual account as second monetary compensation.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
2016/0379248 Al ( presenting opportunities for instant transactions – method and system which includes an instant sell feature)
US 2016/0019614 Al ( online marketplace with seller financing)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ASHA PUTTAIA H whose telephone number is (571)270-1352. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 am to 5:30 pm.
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, Abhishek Vyas can be reached on 571-270-1836. 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.
/ASHA PUTTAIA H/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3691