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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s “Response to Amendment and Reconsideration” filed on 5/11/2026 has been considered.
Claims 1-20 are pending in this application and an action on the merits follows.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, 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.
The claim limitations receiving…from an audit system comprising a POS transaction store”, followed later by “storing the received..in POS transaction store” is unclear as to whether this is the same store references in the audit system or a separate store being populated.
Claims 1-8, 11-18, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103(a) as being unpatentable over Gaubatz (W.O. Patent Publication No. 2022/162169), in view of Mee (W.O. Patent Publication No. 2021/1659907 and further in view of Krikorian et.al. (U.S. Publication No. 2006/0059088).
Regarding claims 1, 11 and 20, Gaubatz teaches receiving one or more point-of-service transaction records generated by a point-of-service device from an audit system comprising a point-of-service transaction store; (the registration device is part of an electronic point-of-sale terminal , a register, for the generation of new unsigned transaction records , wherein the signature device is a remote device and forms part of a remote signature service , to which the registration device is connected via a data network, pg.1.);
storing the received one or more point-of-service transaction records in the point-of- service transaction store further including a plurality of point-of-service transaction records; (the registration device 6 stores the signed transaction record 15 in the transaction storage 16, pg.9.)
retrieving at least a first point-of-service transaction record from the point-of-service transaction store; checking the first point-of-service transaction record, (each signed transaction record comprises an associated value of a key usage counter at the time of the signature, pg.10-11),
in response to the searching indicating a gap due to at least one point-of-service transaction record missing from the point-of-service transaction store, sending a message to a server to provide the at least one missing point-of-service transaction record associated with the gap, in response to the searching indicating the gap is not present, (The registration device 6 receives the signed transaction record 15 but fails to store the signed transaction record 15 in the designated transaction storage 16. The signed transaction record 15 is lost and the key usage counter has a gap, leading to incomplete and invalid data, pg. 10-11, The signature device 8 rejects providing a new signed transaction record 15 due to the detected mismatch of the value of the key usage counter and the expected next value 19 of the key usage counter. An error regarding the signature counter (ERRsc) 20 is reported back to the registration device 6 by the signature device 8 regarding the negative outcome of the precondition check 17. The registration device 6 then sends a request 21 for sending the (missing) previously signed data 22, which can be a (missing) previously signed transaction record 23, to the signature device 8. The registration device 6 is then retrieving the previously signed transaction record 23 from the signature device 8, which the signature device 8 stores in a record buffer 24, pg. 9-10; the registration device 6 sends a request 21 for retransmission of at least one previously signed transaction record 23 , that is stored in the record buffer 24 of the signature device 8, pg. 9-10)
Gaubatz does not explicitly disclose transaction record for a unique identifier, wherein the unique identifier comprises a previous identifier associated with a previous point-of-service transaction record and a current identifier associated with the first point-of-service transaction record; in response to detecting the previous identifier, searching the point-of-service transaction store for at least one other point-of-service transaction record that contains the previous identifier as a current identifier.
However, Mee teaches the blockchain 150 comprises a chain of blocks of data 151, wherein a respective copy of the blockchain 150 is maintained at each of a plurality of blockchain nodes 104 in the distributed or blockchain network 101, pg. 9-10; Each input points back to the output of a preceding transaction 152, thereby linking the transactions, pg. 10; A new transaction is created 686. The new transaction comprises at least an input that is associated with the output from the latest transaction, a dust output, the data item, and a reference to the latest transaction. Preferably, it is the dust output from the latest transaction. Preferably the reference to the latest transaction comprises a hash of a section of the latest transaction. More preferably, the reference is a hash of the preimage of the latest transaction, pg. 35 (Mee teaches a current transaction having both current transaction identifier and reference associated with its preceding transaction); obtaining a transaction identifier of the preceding transaction from the current transaction, obtaining a preceding transaction based on the transaction identifier of the preceding transaction, pg. 7.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date, to modify Gaubatz’s transaction sequence and gap-detection mechanism to include Mee’s linked transaction identifier technique in order to ensure that data, once entered is not tampered with or modified and may be independently audited or that a sequence of events based on data associated with or provided via the platform and/or an arbitrary sequence of data items provided from an arbitrary client, is tamper resistant and can be independently traversed and verified, (see background of Mee)
Gaubatz substantially discloses the claimed invention, however, does not explicitly teach flagging the first point-of-service transaction record as audited; and passing the first point-of-service transaction record to a first system.
However, Krikorian teaches the buyer's ERP 110a automatically validates and approves the purchasing card transactions..updates each matched transaction to "Approved.", the buyer's ERP 110a loads the approved transactions to the open accounts payable database tables, [55,71, 77]. Kriokiran further teaches open Interface table to which approved transaction header lines are transferred..open Interface table to which approved transaction distribution lines are transferred, [78] (passing the first record to a first system).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date, to modify Gaubatz’s point of sale transaction auditing with Krikorian’s method, in order to avoid complicated and costly software customizations, [6].
Regarding claims 2, 12, Mee teaches herein the message sent to the server comprises an indication of the previous identifier, such that the at least one missing point-of-service transaction record provided by the server contains the previous identifier as a current identifier, (see pg. 7)
Regarding claims 3, 13, Krikorian teaches the first system comprises an enterprise resource planning system, [55, 71].
Regarding claim 4, 14, Krikorian teaches audit system is coupled to the enterprise resource planning, (he buyer's ERP system 110a may be coupled to a data repository 170, such as, for example, the MasterCard Global Data Repository. The data repository 170 receives purchasing card transaction data from the buyer's issuer bank or processor 160, [44].
Regarding claim 5, 15, Krikorian teaches wherein the point-of-service transaction store contains the plurality of point-of-service transaction records that have not been audited by the audit system, (transactions that are awaiting approval, [52-53]).
Regarding claim 6, 16, Gaubatz wherein the audit system retrieves the first point-of-service transaction record from the point-of-service transaction store, pg. 1.
Regarding claim 7, 17, Mee teaches performing a duplicate check for at least the first point-of-service transaction record by at least searching for another point-of-service transaction record that contains the current identifier associated with the first point-of-service transaction record, (identifier-based searching, pg 10).
Regarding claim 8, 18, Krikorian teaches in response to the searching for the other point-of-service transaction record that contains the current identifier associated with the first point-of-service transaction record not detecting any duplication records, flagging first record as audited, (e buyer's ERP 110a automatically validates and approves the purchasing card transactions, [71]).
Claims 9-10, 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103(a) as being unpatentable over Gaubatz, Mee and Krikorian combination and further in view of Tso (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2008/0209249).
Regarding claims 9-10, 19, the combination does not explicitly teach the previous identifier and the current identifier each comprise a 128-bit value configured to provide a universally unique identifier; the previous identifier and the current identifier each comprise a date, a time, a media-access control (MAC) address, and/or a random value.
However, Tso teaches a random UUID (also referred to as a type 4 UUID) is typically 16-bytes (128-bits) long and includes a random number portion of 122 random bits, [19], The UUID Library utility 212 generates the random UUID from information including, but not limited to, the network address of the host system 200 and the current time, [19], UUIDs as specified in RFC 4122, [19] UUID library application that generates a time-based universally unique identifier (UUID) using the MAC network address of the host, a timestamp, and a clock sequence counter, [4].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date, to modify combination’s audit system with Tso’s UUID generation in order to reduce identifier collisions, [4].
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to 35 U.S.C. 101 have been considered. Although claims recite an abstract idea relating to auditing or identifying missing transaction records, the claims as a whole integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The claims recite a specific arrangement in which a transaction record includes previous and current identifier, the previous identifier is searched as the current identifier of another transaction record and a detected break o that relationship causes retrieval of the missing record from a server. The specification shows that this chained-identifier architecture permits gaps to be detected without loading and cross-referencing larger quantities of POS records across stores and times periods by reducing memory and processor requirements, (see Fig. 3A-C, [40-47]).
Applicant’s arguments with respect to 35 U.S.C. 103 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MILENA RACIC whose telephone number is (571)270-5933. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30am-4pm 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, Florian (Ryan) Zeender can be reached at (571)272-6790. 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.
/MILENA RACIC/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3627
/FLORIAN M ZEENDER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3627
Prosecution Insights