CTNF 18/960,183 CTNF 86015 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. DETAILED ACTION This is the initial office action has been issued in response to patent application, 18/960183, filed on 26 November 2024 with a continuation priority date of 28 May 2019. Claim 1, as originally filed, are currently pending and have been considered below. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement filed 07/19/2010 complies with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98 and MPEP § 609 and the information referred to therein has been considered as to the merits. Double Patenting 08-33 AIA 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 obviousness-type 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); and 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 a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b). Claim 1: Claim 1 have similar limitations as in claim 1 of Patent 12192209 (application 17/963506). Although the conflicting claims are not identical; they are not patentably distinct from each other because both applications claim crawling one or more webpages of a website to generate one or more rules to automatically navigate to a webpage to change payment token information associated with the website; and storing the one or more rules in a navigation file to change payment token information, the navigation file, in response to being initiated, to cause performance of the one or more rules to automatically navigate to the webpage to change payment token information. This is an obviousness-type double patenting rejection because the conflicting claims have in fact been patented. Claim 1: Claim 1 have similar limitations as in claim 10 of Patent 10523681 (application 16/423939). Although the conflicting claims are not identical; they are not patentably distinct from each other because both applications claim crawling one or more webpages of a website to generate one or more rules to automatically navigate to a webpage to change payment token information associated with the website; and storing the one or more rules in a navigation file to change payment token information, the navigation file, in response to being initiated, to cause performance of the one or more rules to automatically navigate to the webpage to change payment token information. This is an obviousness-type double patenting rejection because the conflicting claims have in fact been patented. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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 of this title, 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Isaacson et al. (US 2018/0025442 A1, Isaacson hereinafter), in view of Best et al. (US 20160148177 A1, hereinafter Best ) . For claim 1 , Isaacson teaches a computer-implemented method, comprising: crawling one or more webpages of a website to generate one or more rules to automatically navigate to a webpage to change payment token information associated with the website; and storing the one or more rules in a navigation file to change payment token information (para 0108, 0110, 0133, 0219 - navigation in which the server requests crawls to the merchant website to update or populate fields including the payment information, wherein the instructions are generated/scripted based on conditions or steps required, wherein the user-selected or updated tokenized payment information is communicated to the merchant website where it is updated in the process, and navigation to sites to determine rules or conditions associated with payment and are stored further to be utilized in future script or API calls; para 0134, 0149, 0151-0152 - tokenized payment information being passed and the rule or protocol to automatically populate payment fields). Isaacson teaches automated and manual navigation and use of scripts in navigation to the webpage and the change in the payment token information as discussed above. Isaacson does not teach however Best teaches storing the one or more rules in a file to change payment token information, the file, in response to being initiated, to cause performance of the one or more rules to automatically navigate to the webpage to change payment token information (para 0117, 0172, 0189, 0193 - execution of scripts and navigation to webpages, and automatic pushing of payment information update; para 0023-0024, 0034, 0193 - various conditions or methods associated with payment information update or push, as rules that guide the process that may be programmed as web application and as part of the script, wherein the script has one or more rules for automatic navigation to the webpage to change the payment token information, and automatically navigating to the webpage to change the payment token information). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize features disclosed by Best in the system of Isaacson for better organization and control of the method that performs navigation and token update for user activity associated with payment at one or more websites, thereby achieving a controlled application of pertinent rules leading to more secure execution of payment token manipulations or update . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, see PTO Form 892 . 07-101 Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Helai Salehi whose telephone number is 571-270-7468 . The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday from 9 am to 5 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.usp to. gov/interviewpractice . If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Jeff Pwu , can be reached on 571-272-6798 . The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000 . /HELAI SALEHI/Examiner, Art Unit 2433 /JEFFREY C PWU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2433 Application/Control Number: 18/960,183 Page 2 Art Unit: 2433 Application/Control Number: 18/960,183 Page 3 Art Unit: 2433 Application/Control Number: 18/960,183 Page 4 Art Unit: 2433 Application/Control Number: 18/960,183 Page 5 Art Unit: 2433 Application/Control Number: 18/960,183 Page 6 Art Unit: 2433 Application/Control Number: 18/960,183 Page 7 Art Unit: 2433 Application/Control Number: 18/960,183 Page 8 Art Unit: 2433
Prosecution Insights