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
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments regarding all rejections of the claims have been considered and are persuasive. New rejections of the pending claims are provided below. Applicant’s arguments regarding the 101 rejection of the claims is moot as they do not apply to any received rejection of the present claims.
Nevertheless, the Office asserts that the claims consist of a business practice implemented by generic computer devices using generic computer software elements such as tooltips, pop-up windows, hover elements, etc. The claims receive data and compare that data to data in one or more databased to determine whether to validate the data or not. The result of the lookup is created and transformed into a more data (data manipulation) and finally presented to the user. Applicant’s arguments that the claims are more than the above are unpersuasive as the claims simply do not confer a practical application or inventive concept such as an improvement to the computer, technology or technological field, applying the abstract idea in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment, or adding a specific limitation that is more than what is well-understood, routine and conventional. Applicant’s arguments merely assert that the abstract idea itself or the additional elements confer a practical application or inventive concept but fail to identify the necessary improvement, meaningful limitation or unconventional limitation.
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.
Claim(s) 15, 16, 29 and 34-50 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s):
15. A system for validating target account data, the system comprising:
a memory storing instructions; and at least one processor configured to execute the stored instructions to:
generate a platform that enables payment initiation on an endpoint device;
access the platform;
generate a tooltip for display on the platform, wherein the tooltip provides information about the platform and a payment initiation status associated with validation of the target account data;
receive, through the endpoint device, a first input associated with the target account data;
receive, through the endpoint device, a second input associated with the target account data;
upon receipt of the first input and the second input, enable selection of an activatable element, wherein selection of the activatable element initiates use of one or more repositories;
in response to selection of the activatable element, transmit the first input and the second input to a server, wherein the server comprises the one or more repositories;
receive, from the server, information associated with the first input and the second input;
compare the first input and the second input with the information to determine a degree of correspondence, wherein the degree of correspondence indicates a close or exact match, a conditional or partial match, no match, or no identifying data available;
generate, using a machine learning algorithm, a transformed result based on the degree of correspondence, wherein the transformed result includes an indication of whether payment initiation is permitted;
change the tooltip, wherein the changed tooltip includes a user interface component corresponding to the indication of whether payment initiation is permitted; and
present the user interface component of the changed tooltip on the endpoint device prior to completion of payment initiation.
The underlined portion of the claims represent certain methods of organizing human activity, fundamental economic practices of mitigating risk, because the claims are directed to validating the recipient of a payment.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claim adds. The claims include a system for performing the abstract idea including a memory, a processor and instructions, a server, a platform, an endpoint device with a user interface component, an activatable element, a tooltip, and a machine learning model, all of which are generically recited such that they cannot be considered particular machines, effect a transformation (other than data), reflect an improvement in the computer or technology or apply the abstract idea in some other meaningful way. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because of the reasons cited above.
The dependent claims merely narrow the abstract idea or add additional elements as tools to implement the abstract idea (API, pop-up window) and, in combination and as a whole, comprise the abstract idea and the words “apply it”, the like. Claim 29 is similarly rejected.
Claim 26 further narrows the result, further narrowing the abstract idea. Claims 40, 41 and 49 provide further information to the user, further narrowing the abstract idea. Claims 34, 35, 43 and 44 further narrow the lookup process, part of the abstract idea. Claims 36-39 and 45-48 further narrow the indication step, further narrowing the abstract idea. Claims 42 and 50 add further elements comprising adding the words “apply it” (API).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 WILLIAM E RANKINS whose telephone number is (571)270-3465. The examiner can normally be reached on 9-530 M-F.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Bennett Sigmond can be reached on 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 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.
/WILLIAM E RANKINS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3694
Prosecution Insights