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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Priority
1. Applicant claims foreign priority to applications CH001352023 & IT02023000026034 filed on 12/5/23. Foreign priority is not granted because the Office was unable to retrieve under the priority document exchange program, the foreign priority application CH001352023, see the email communication sent by the office on 5/5/25.
Claim Interpretation
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.
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) because the claim limitations use 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.
The claim limitations from claims 14 are: “a data processing unit”, “a remote verification data process unit”
The claim limitations from claim 22 are “a verification data processing unit”, “data processing unit”
Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed functions, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed functions); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitations recite sufficient structure to perform the claimed functions so as to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f).
Claim Objection
Claims 1-14 are objected to for the following reasons:
Each step of a method claim must end with a semicolon and each limitation must begin with the actual step.
Applicant is advised to remove the “-“ in each step of the method.
Regarding claim 1:
The steps (a step of electronic generation of a primary file, a step of association, a step of assignment) all end with a comma. These steps need to end with a semicolon.
Furthermore, a method claim needs to have active functional language.
Examiner suggest re-writing the claim as:
[[-]] a step of electronically acquiring [[of] at least a characteristic….
[[-]] a step of electronically generating [[of]] a primary file… in a memory[[,]];
[[-]] a step of associating, comprising an electronic association…said object or user[[,]];
[[-]] a step of assigning [[of]] an economic availability…..or financial instrument[[,]];
[[-]] a step of provisioning [[of]] an electronic access….
Regarding claim 14, applicant is advised to remove the “-“ in each step.
Claim Rejections- 35 U.S.C § 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.
2. Claims 1-26 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.
Claim 1 recites, “said characteristic is suitable for and/or destined to and/or configured to,,”
It is unclear to Examiner how the “characteristic” is suitable for, destined to and both suitable for and destined to, configured to, and both suitable for and configured to.
“Suitable for” under BRI means appropriate for a particular solution
“destined to” under BRI means an action will happen in the future
“Configured to” under BRI means to put together in a particular form.
Claim 1 further recites, “wherein said element is different from an element traditionally used for a payment, preferably is different from an element traditionally used for an electronic payment, and/or wherein said element is not a payment card, and/or is not a banknote, and/or is not a bank account, and wherein said primary file is a limited access file”. Examiner is unable to determine the metes and bounds of this claim limitation.
Applicant is pointed to MPEP 2173.05(c):
2173.05(c) Numerical Ranges and Amounts Limitations [R-11.2013]
Generally, the recitation of specific numerical ranges in a claim does not raise an issue of whether a claim is definite.
I. NARROW AND BROADER RANGES IN THE SAME CLAIM
Use of a narrow numerical range that falls within a broader range in the same claim may render the claim indefinite when the boundaries of the claim are not discernible. Description of examples and preferences is properly set forth in the specification rather than in a single claim. A narrower range or preferred embodiment may also be set forth in another independent claim or in a dependent claim. If stated in a single claim, examples and preferences lead to confusion over the intended scope of the claim. In those instances where it is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation, a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph should be made. The Examiner should analyze whether the metes and bounds of the claim are clearly set forth. Examples of claim language which have been held to be indefinite are (A) "a temperature of between 45 and 78 degrees Celsius, preferably between 50 and 60 degrees Celsius"; and (B) "a predetermined quantity, for example, the maximum capacity."
Claims 14 recites the same claim language and is rejected using the same rationale as claim 1.
Claim 2 recites “wherein said characteristic is a characteristic physical and/or intrinsic and/or naturally present on said element or is a characteristic artificially brought on said element and/or is a visible characteristic of said element or is a hidden characteristic of said element.
The number of combinations for “the characteristic” is extremely large. The metes and bounds of the claim scope are unclear. Examiner is not able to consider all the different possible combinations of said “characteristic”.
Claim 2 further recites “wherein said element is different from an element traditionally used for a payment, preferably is different from an element traditionally used for an electronic payment”, this language is unclear.
The limitations, “preferably is different from an element traditionally used for electronic payment and used for electronic payment is subjective. As one of ordinary skill in the art’s knowledge does change over time, and a person’s personal knowledge may differ from Examiner to Examiner and different Examiners would have different choices, or preferences.
The metes and bounds of this claim limitation is unclear.
Claim 3 recites, “wherein said acquisition device comprises at least one among the following devices: a roughness.
It is unclear to Examiner how a device can be a “roughness”, as under BRI roughness is defined as the quality of having an uneven or irregular surface.
Claims 2-13, 15-26 are rejected using the same rationale as their respective independent claims 1&14, as they fail to cure the deficiency of claims 1&14.
Claim Rejections- 35 U.S.C § 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.
3. Claims 1-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claims 1, 14 are directed to a system, method and system which are statutory categories of invention. (Step 1: YES).
Representative claim 1 recites the limitations of:
Method of electronic association between elements and payment systems, comprising:
- a step of electronic acquisition of at least a characteristic of a real or virtual element, owned by, and/or associated to, a subject or user, through an acquisition device, preferably wherein said characteristic is suitable for and/or destined to, and/or configured to, allow a univocal identification of said element;
- a step of electronic generation of a primary file containing at least characteristic electronic data, univocally identifying said at least a characteristic of said element, and a step of memorization of said primary file in a memory,
- a step of association, comprising an electronic association between said primary file and at least a payment or financial instrument, preferably associated to a financial or banking institute, preferably said payment or financial instrument being owned by, and/or selectively assigned to, said subject or user,
- a step of assignment of an economic availability, said step of assignment of said economic availability being preferably result of, and/or temporally successive to, said step of association and comprising at least a univocal assignment, to said primary file, of an economic availability associated to said payment or financial instrument,
- a step of provision of an electronic access, comprising making accessible, preferably to a remote verification data processing unit, an electronic search, on said memory, of at least said primary file, through an electronic comparison between at least a comparison file containing characteristic electronic data, identifying at least a characteristic of a comparison element, and said primary file.
These limitations, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitation as certain methods of organizing human activity.
The claim recites elements that are in bold above, which covers performance of the limitation as a commercial interaction, steps for determining economic availability of a financial instrument
(e.g., a step of acquisition of at least a characteristic of a real or virtual element, owned by, and/or associated to, a subject or user, preferably wherein said characteristic is suitable for and/or destined to, and/or configured to, allow a univocal identification of said element; a step of generation of a primary file containing at least characteristic data, univocally identifying said at least a characteristic of said element, and a step of memorization of said primary file, a step of association, comprising an association between said primary file and at least a payment or financial instrument , preferably associated to a financial or banking institute, preferably said payment or financial instrument being owned by, and/or selectively assigned to, said subject or user, a step of assignment of an economic availability, said step of assignment of said economic availability being preferably result of, and/or temporally successive to, said step of association and comprising at least a univocal assignment, to said primary file, of an economic availability associated to said payment or financial instrument, a step of provision of an access, an search, of at least said primary file, through an comparison between at least a comparison file containing characteristic data, identifying at least a characteristic of a comparison element, and said primary file)
If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation as a Commercial Interaction, then it falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas.
Claim14 is abstract for similar reasons.
(Step 2A-Prong 1: YES. The claims are abstract).
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. Limitations that are not indicative of integration into a practical application include: (1) Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05.f), (2) Adding insignificant extra solution activity to the judicial exception (MPEP 2106.05.g), (3) Generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (MPEP 2106.05.h).
Claims 1,14 includes the following additional elements:
-An acquisition device
-A memory
-A remote verification data unit
-A data processing unit
The acquisition device, memory, remote verification data unit and data processing unit are recited at a high level of generality and are being used in their ordinary capacity and are being used as a tool for implementing the steps of the identified abstract idea, see MPEP 2106.05(f), where applying a computer or using a computer as a tool to perform the abstract idea is not indicative of a practical application.
Accordingly, these additional elements, when considered separately and as an ordered combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea
Therefore claims 1, 14 are directed to an abstract idea without a practical application. (Step 2A-Prong 2: NO. The additional claimed elements are not integrated into a practical application)
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because, when considered separately and as an ordered combination, they do not add significantly more (also known as an “inventive concept”) to the exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, there are no additional elements recited in the claim beyond the judicial exception.
Mere instructions to implement an abstract idea, on or with the use of generic computer components, or even without any computer components, cannot provide an inventive concept - rendering the claim patent ineligible. Thus claims 1,14 are not patent eligible. (Step 2B: NO. The claims do not provide significantly more)
Dependent claims 2-13, 15-26 further define the abstract idea that is present in their respective independent claims 1, 14 and thus correspond to Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity and hence are abstract for the reasons presented above.
Claims 3, 16 further defines the identified abstract idea as recited in claims 1,14. The additional element of the acquisition device comprises a camera, file receiver, roughness or weight identifier are recited a high level of generality, operating in their ordinary capacity, and are being used as a tool to implement the steps of the identified abstract idea, see MPEP 2106.05(f)
Claims 10,22 further defines the identified abstract idea recited in claims 1,14. The additional element of a computerized comparison system & verification data process unit is recited at a high level of generality, operating in their ordinary capacity and are being used as a tool to implement the steps of the identified abstract idea.
Therefore, the dependent claims do not include any additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception when considered both individually and as an ordered combination. Therefore, the dependent claims (2-13, 15-26) are directed to an abstract idea. Thus, the claims 1-26 are not patent-eligible.
Claim Rejections- 35 U.S.C § 102
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.
4. Claims 1-9, 13-22, 26 are being rejected under 35 U.S.C 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent 11,042,869 to Jezorek et al, herein Jezorek.
Regarding claim 1, Jezorek discloses:
Method of electronic association between elements and payment systems, comprising:
- a step of electronic acquisition of at least a characteristic of a real or virtual element, owned by, and/or associated to, a subject or user, through an acquisition device, preferably wherein said characteristic is suitable for and/or destined to, and/or configured to, allow a univocal identification of said element (At least: column 2: lines 66-67; column 3: lines 1-7; column 4: lines 30-39);
column 2: lines 66-67; column 3: lines 1-7:
Additionally, the interface may include an option to enable the entity to upload images of an object to the payment object service such that these images may be used to generate the desired 3-D payment object. Once the entity has either selected a design from the design selection pane or has uploaded his/her own images to be used in the creation of the 3-D payment object, the entity may specify the value that is to be associated with the object to be created
Column 4: lines 30-39:
As another example, a unique feature of a three-dimensional object may not be readily discernable except, perhaps, by a computer system programmed to detect such unique features. In some examples, such as where some or all image processing is done locally on a mobile or other device, more efficient operation of a distributed computer system (e.g., including a mobile device and a server) is achieved through the ability to perform some operations without network calls
- a step of electronic generation of a primary file containing at least characteristic electronic data, univocally identifying said at least a characteristic of said element, and a step of memorization of said primary file in a memory (At least: column 6: lines 20-29; column 10: lines 36-44);
Column 6: lines 20-29:
It should be noted that these unique features may render the 3-D payment object 108 to be unique in a database of payment objects such that, by providing information corresponding to these unique features, the payment object service 102 may identify a record of the 3-D payment object 108 within the database. The payment object service 102 may store these modified images within an object data repository for later use by the customer 104 and for verification of the 3-D payment object 108 once activated
Column 10: lines 36-44:
Once the customer has either selected, through the interface 204, the one or more images that are to be utilized to generate the 3-D payment object or has provided his/her own images to the payment object service 202, the management sub-system 206 may access the customer account information data store 208 to access the customer's account and specify, within the account, the location of the one or more data files associated with the 3-D payment object stored within the object data repository
- a step of association, comprising an electronic association between said primary file and at least a payment or financial instrument, preferably associated to a financial or banking institute, preferably said payment or financial instrument being owned by, and/or selectively assigned to, said subject or user (At least: column 12: lines 23-30);
Column 12: lines 23-30:
Once a match has been identified, the management sub-system 206 may be able to identify, within the customer account information data store 208, the specific customer account associated with the 3-D payment object to determine the current payment value of the 3-D payment object. This payment value may be applied to a present payment transaction, future payment transaction or added to the recipient's account for later use. Additionally, the management sub-system 206 may update the payment value of the 3-D payment object upon use.
- a step of assignment of an economic availability, said step of assignment of said economic availability being preferably result of, and/or temporally successive to, said step of association and comprising at least a univocal assignment, to said primary file, of an economic availability associated to said payment or financial instrument, (At least: column 10: lines 44-50; column 30: lines 54-67);
Column 10: lines 44-50:
Further, the management sub-system 206 may specify, within the customer's account the payment value of the 3-D payment object and the identity of the intended recipient if other than the customer (e.g., another account identifier within the customer account information data store 208, recipient name and address, etc.).
Column 30: lines 54-67:
As noted above, a giver may access a payment object service to request association of a payment amount to an object. The object may either be unique or non-unique (e.g., mass-produced and/or readily available). The payment object service may utilize one or more images of the object to associate the specified payment amount to the object and enable delivery of the object to a recipient, who may be able to access the payment object service to redeem the associated payment amount associated with the object. Accordingly, FIG. 16 shows an illustrative example of a process 1600 for associating a payment amount to an object in response to a giver request in accordance with at least one embodiment. The process 1600 may be performed by the aforementioned payment object service, which may be configured to receive requests from one or more givers through an interface or other application installed on a giver computer system. Further, the payment object service may be configured to deliver the object to a recipient upon request by the giver. The payment object service may also interact with or provide a marketplace, wherein givers may select one or more objects that may be used as payment objects and delivered to the recipient upon request
- a step of provision of an electronic access, comprising making accessible, preferably to a remote verification data processing unit, an electronic search, on said memory, of at least said primary file, through an electronic comparison between at least a comparison file containing characteristic electronic data, identifying at least a characteristic of a comparison element, and said primary file (At least: column 7: lines 51-63; column 8: lines 53-61).
Column 7: lines 51-63:
Once the 3-D payment object 108 has been created and delivered to the customer 104 or other intended recipient, the 3-D payment object may be utilized for payment transactions, for adding value to a particular account associated with the payment object service 102, or for at least one mode of authentication (e.g., access to a particular service, such as the payment object service 102, a payment account, or to another service and/or authentication of a payment). For instance, in an embodiment, a customer 104 or recipient of the 3-D payment object 108 can utilize a mobile device 110 to scan the 3-D payment object 108 and provide scanned images of the 3-D payment object 108 to the payment object service 102 for verification
Column 8: lines 53-61:
When the payment object service 102 receives information associated with the 3-D payment object 108 from the mobile device 110, the payment object service 102 may analyze this information to determine whether the scanned 3-D payment object corresponds to an existing 3-D payment object that has been created by the payment object service 102 or has been created by a customer 104 utilizing his/her personal 3-D printing device 106 using specifications provided by the payment object service 102.
Regarding claim 2, Jezorek discloses the method according to claim 1. Jezorek further discloses wherein said characteristic is a univocal characteristic of said element or is a characteristic destined to allow a univocal identification of said element, and/or wherein said characteristic is a characteristic physical and/or intrinsic and/or naturally present on said element or is a characteristic artificially brought on said element and/or is a visible characteristic of said element or is a hidden characteristic of said element (At least: column 8: lines 41-52) ;
said characteristic differing from an alphanumerical code and/or differing from a known visual code, and/or being a characteristic representable through an image (At least: column 8: lines 33-37);
wherein said element is different from an element traditionally used for a payment, preferably is different from an element traditionally used for an electronic payment, and/or wherein said element is not a payment card, and/or is not a banknote, and/or is not a bank account, and wherein said primary file is a limited access file, preferably limited to said subject or user, in particular wherein: (At least: column 7: lines 51-54) ;
- at least the characteristic electronic data of said primary file can be altered exclusively by said subject or user after an electronic introduction and verification of access credentials electronically entered by said subject or user on an electronic user interface, and/or - at least the characteristic electronic data of said primary file can be read exclusively by said subject or user after an electronic introduction and verification of access credentials electronically entered by said subject or user on an electronic user interface, or by said verification data processing unit , and/or - said financial or banking institute has no access to said characteristic electronic data (At least: column 9: lines 38-51, 55-58);
Claim 15 is being rejected using the same rationale as claim 2.
Regarding claim 3, Jezorek discloses the method according to claim 1. Jezorek further discloses wherein said step of electronic acquisition is a step of scanning, and/or wherein said acquisition device comprises at least one among the following devices: a camera, a file receiver, a roughness or weight identifier (At least: column 8: lines 21-25) ;
preferably wherein said step of scanning is a two-dimensional scan or is a three-dimensional scan, and wherein said camera is a two-dimensional or three-dimensional camera, optionally wherein said camera is a camera operating in the visible and/or infrared and/or ultraviolet spectrum; said characteristic electronic data being image data (At least: column 8: lines 33-52).
Claim 16 is being rejected using the same rationale as claim 3.
Regarding claim 4, Jezorek discloses the method according to claim 1. Jezorek further discloses comprising a step of definition of at least a customized payment condition, preferably comprising a step of definition of a plurality of customized payment conditions, wherein said at least one customized payment condition is a customized payment condition defined by the user, and is in use defined by the subject or user (At least: column 2: lines 55-62) ;
said at least a payment condition comprising at least one among:
- a temporal validity of said element as payment element;
- an electronic association to an electronic verification code sent by said banking or financing institute associated to said payment or financial instrument to an electronic device associated to said subject or user, said electronic verification code acting as an element of confirmation to an execution of the payment;
- an electronic association to a further element a characteristic thereof has been associated to a primary file, preferably through the steps described in the method according to claim 1 (At least : column 12: lines 23-30)
- a payment limitation as a function of a geographical position of said element and/or of a merchandise category associated to a payment; preferably wherein said economic availability associated to said payment or financial instrument is equal to or lower than an overall economic availability of said payment or financial instrument
Claim 17 is being rejected using the same rationale as claim 4.
Regarding claim 5, Jezorek discloses the method according to claim 1. Jezorek further discloses comprising a step of provision of an electronic user interface, said step of provision being destined to allow, in particular said subject or user, to set, adapt or delete said at least one customized payment condition (At least: column 4: lines 39-43) ;
said method comprising, in alternative or in combination, a step of cancellation of said comparison file, automatically performed after an arrangement of said payment and/or after a step of execution of an electronic payment through said payment or financial instrument (At least: column 17: lines 51-67; column 18: lines 1-3).
Claim 18 is being rejected using the same rationale as claim 5.
Regarding claim 6, Jezorek discloses the method according to claim 4. Jezorek further discloses comprising a step of memorization of said at least a customized payment condition as additional data in said primary file (At least: column 14: lines 57-64) or as associated data of a payment file stored in a memory of said financial or banking institute.
Claim 19 is being rejected using the same rationale as claim 6.
Regarding claim 7, Jezorek discloses the method according to claim 1. Jezorek further discloses comprising a step of definition of a minimum threshold of similarity between the characteristic electronic data, univocally identifying said at least a characteristic of said element and stored in said primary file and the characteristic electronic data univocally identifying said at least a characteristic of said comparison element and stored in said comparison file, wherein said minimum threshold when exceeded, is destined to determine and/or force a logical identity between the characteristic electronic data stored in said comparison file and the characteristic electronic data stored in said primary file and to authorize an arrangement of an electronic payment through said payment or financial instrument (At least: column 7: lines 51-63; column 8: lines 53-61).
Claim 20 is being rejected using the same rationale as claim 7.
Regarding claim 8, Jezorek discloses the method according to claim 1. Jezorek further discloses comprising a step of modification of said element comprising bringing to said element said characteristic by adapting a structural or physical characteristic thereof, and comprises selecting a casual and optionally non-repeatable characteristic or a casual and optionally non-repeatable characteristic defined in a predefined characteristics pattern (At least: column 17: lines 3-19).
Claim 21 is being rejected using the same rationale as claim 8.
Regarding claim 9, Jezorek discloses a step of electronic access to a data processing unit operatively associated to a memory upon which it is stored a primary file generated in accordance to the method according to claim 1. Jezorek further discloses a method of authorization of a payment, comprising,
- a step of electronic acquisition of at least a characteristic of a real or virtual comparison element owned by, and/or or associated to, a subject or user, through an acquisition device, preferably wherein said characteristic is suitable for and/or destined to, and/or configured to, allow a univocal identification of said comparison element (At least: column 2: lines 66-67; column 3: lines 1-7; column 4: lines 30-39);
;
- a step of electronic generation of a comparison file containing at least characteristic electronic data univocally identifying said at least a characteristic of said comparison element and a step of memorization of said file in a memory (At least: column 7: lines 51-63; column 8: lines 53-61);
- a step of electronic comparison, temporally following said step of electronic access, said step of electronic comparison comprising an electronic comparison between at least the comparison file and said primary file ((At least: column 7: lines 51-63; column 8: lines 53-61);
;
wherein: - if from said step of electronic comparison results that said comparison file and said primary file contain characteristic electronic data univocally identifying said characteristic identical or having greater similarity with respect to a predetermined minimum threshold of similarity, there is an arrangement of an electronic payment through said payment or financial instrument (At least: column 18: lines 45-63);
, and
- otherwise, there is an electronic denial to said electronic payment (At least: column 18: lines 45-63).
Claim 22 is being rejected using the same rationale as claim 9.
Regarding claim 13, Jezorek discloses a method for executing a payment, comprising: - a method of authorization of a payment according to claim 9. Jezorek further discloses;
- a step of electronic definition of a payment amount, equal to or lower than said economic availability associated to said payment or financial instrument (At least: Fig 16 and associated text; Fig 18 and associated text ;
- a step of execution of said payment, comprising an electronic reduction of said economic availability associated to said payment or financial instrument, for an amount corresponding to said payment amount (At least: Abstract);
optionally said method comprising an electronic comparison between said payment amount and said economic availability associated to said payment or financial instrument or an electronic comparison between said payment amount and an overall economic availability of said payment or financial instrument, an execution of said payment only occurring when, following said electronic comparison, results that said payment amount is lower than or equal to said economic availability or to said overall economic availability (At least: column 15: lines 36-38, 44-48).
Claim 26 is being rejected using the same rationale as claim 13.
Regarding claim 14, Metral discloses:
Distributed computing environment for the electronic association among elements and payment systems, comprising (At least: column 12: lines 49-58);
- a data processing unit, operatively connected to an acquisition device and configured to receive from said acquisition device characteristic electronic data, univocally identifying at least a characteristic of a real or virtual element and owned or associated to a subject or user, and wherein said characteristic is electronically acquired through the acquisition device, preferably wherein said characteristic is destined to allow the univocal identification of said element (At least: column 4: lines 30-39);
wherein said data processing unit is configured to generate at least a primary file containing said characteristic electronic data and to store said primary file in a memory (At least: column 6: lines 20-29; column 10: lines 36-44);
the distributed computing environment being configured to perform an electronic association of said primary file to at least a payment or financial instrument, preferably associated to a financial or banking institute, preferably said payment or financial instrument being owned by, and/or selectively assigned to, said subject or user (At least: column 12: lines 23-30);
the distributed computing environment being configured to univocally assign, preferably as a result of said electronic association, and/or in subsequently to said electronic association, an economic availability to said primary file, wherein said economic availability is associated to said payment or financial instrument (At least: column 10: lines 44-50; column 30: lines 54-67)
the distributed computing environment is configured to provide an electronic access, preferably to a remote verification data processing unit, to perform an electronic search, on said memory, of at least said primary file, through an electronic comparison between at least a comparison file containing characteristic electronic data identifying at least a characteristic of a comparison element and said primary file (At least: column 7: lines 51-63; column 8: lines 53-61).
Claim Rejections- 35 U.S.C § 103
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.
5. Claims 10-12, 23-25 are being rejected under 35 U.S.C 103(a) as being unpatentable over Jezorek in view of US 2014/0046837 to Metral.
Regarding claim 10, Jezorek discloses the method according to claim 9. Jezorek further discloses wherein if from said step of electronic comparison results that said comparison file and said primary file contain characteristic electronic data identifying said at least a characteristic identical or having greater similarity with respect to a predetermined minimum threshold of similarity (At least: column 23: lines 48-60)
Jezorek does not disclose, Metral in the same field of endeavor discloses:
, the method comprises:
- operatively connecting said acquisition device with said financial or banking institute and/or with said payment or financial instrument for accessing a payment file and/or said memory for receiving said primary file (At least:[0024], [0040]
- receiving an economic availability associated to said payment or financial instrument from said payment file and/or from said primary file (At least: [0040], [0044]
optionally wherein said step of electronic comparison is performed by a verification data processing unit operatively, optionally operatively and directly, connected to the acquisition device or is performed by a computerized comparison system, electronically activated by said verification data processing unit and remote and distinct with respect to said verification data processing unit (At least:[0049]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to modify Jezorek’s invention to include operatively connecting said acquisition device with said financial or banking institute and/or with said payment or financial instrument for accessing a payment file and/or said memory for receiving said primary file, - receiving an economic availability associated to said payment or financial instrument from said payment file and/or from said primary file, optionally wherein said step of electronic comparison is performed by a verification data processing unit operatively, optionally operatively and directly, connected to the acquisition device or is performed by a computerized comparison system, electronically activated by said verification data processing unit and remote and distinct with respect to said verification data processing unit in order to ensure that the sender can communicate with a service provider to conduct a transactions using payment service provider server using a physical object ([0020]).
Claim 24 is being rejected using the same rationale as claim 10.
Regarding claim 11, Jezorek disclose the method according to claim 9. Jezorek further discloses wherein said primary file is a limited access file, preferably limited to said subject or user, in particular wherein: - at least the characteristic electronic data of said primary file can be altered exclusively by said subject or user after an electronic introduction and verification of access credentials electronically entered by said subject or user on an electronic user interface (At least: column 9: lines 38-51; column 17: lines 3-19), and/or - at least the characteristic electronic data of said primary file can be read exclusively by said subject or user after an electronic introduction and verification of access credentials electronically entered by said subject or user on an electronic user interface, or by said verification data processing unit, and/or by said computerized comparison system (At least: column 7: lines 51-63; column 8: lines 53-61).
Jezorek does not disclose, Metral discloses and/or - said financial or banking institute has no access to said characteristic electronic data (At least: [0020], [0024]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to modify Jezorek’s invention to include and/or - said financial or banking institute has no access to said characteristic electronic data in order to ensure that the security of the transaction is maintained by the applications on the sender device include client side security features, which further allows senders to access content through the apps (Metral: [0021]).
Claim 23 is being rejected using the same rationale as claim 11.
Regarding claim 12, Jezorek discloses the method according to claim 9, Jezorek further discloses wherein if from said step of electronic comparison results that said comparison file and said primary file contain characteristic electronic data identifying said at least a characteristic identical or having greater similarity with respect to a predetermined minimum threshold of similarity (At least: column 18: lines 45-63);
Jezorek does not disclose, Metral discloses:
, the method comprises:
- electronically verifying, preferably by said primary file or by the payment file stored in the memory of said financial or banking institute, the presence of at least an additional payment condition, and if said at least an additional payment condition is present (At least: [0038], [0024]);
- electronically verifying if said at least an additional payment condition is met (At least: [0038]);
preferably wherein verifying if said at least an additional payment condition is met comprises at least one among the following actions:
- electronically verifying a temporal validity of said element as payment element, preferably comparing a current data and/or time with a memorized date and/or time of validity cessation stored in said primary file or in said payment file (At least: [0038];
- electronically verifying, through a verification data processing unit operatively associated to an acquisition device, the coherence and/or identity of an electronic verification code sent by said banking or financing institute associated to said payment or financial instrument to an electronic device associated to said subject or user with a code electronically introduced in said verification data processing unit;
- electronically verifying, through a verification data processing unit operatively associated to an acquisition device, a correct identification of at least a further element a characteristic thereof has been associated to a primary file, preferably through the steps described;
- electronically verifying, through a verification data processing unit operatively associated to an acquisition device, a coherence or identity between a position currently held by said element with a geographical position of authorization, stored in said primary file or in said payment file; and
proceeding with said step of arrangement of said transaction only when the electronic verification gives a positive result.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to modify Jezorek’s invention to include, the method comprises: - electronically verifying, preferably by said primary file or by the payment file stored in the memory of said financial or banking institute, the presence of at least an additional payment condition, and if said at least an additional payment condition is present; - electronically verifying if said at least an additional payment condition is met; preferably wherein verifying if said at least an additional payment condition is met comprises at least one among the following actions: - electronically verifying a temporal validity of said element as payment element, preferably comparing a current data and/or time with a memorized date and/or time of validity cessation stored in said primary file or in said payment file in order to ensure that payment conditions are satisfied before gift card is able to be redeemed (Metral: [0038]).
Claim 25 is being rejected using the same rationale as claim 12.
CONCLUSION
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMAD Z SHAIKH whose telephone number is (571)270-3444. The examiner can normally be reached M-T, 9-600; Fri, 8-11, 3-5.
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, BENNETT SIGMOND can be reached at 303-297-4411. 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.
/MOHAMMAD Z SHAIKH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3694 3/17/2026