DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
The Response filed 04/14/2026 has been acknowledged. Claims 1-4, 11-12, 20 have been amended. Claims 5-10, 13-19 are cancelled. Claims 1-4, 11-12, 20 are currently pending and have been examined.
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 11 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. As currently claimed, claims 11 and 20 are dependent on independent claims 1 and 12 respectively. Claims 11 and 20 fail to further limit the systems of the respective independent claims are the non-transitory computer readable media contain instructions for implementing the systems of respective independent claims without further limiting the respective claimed systems. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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 1-4, 11-12, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim recites a computer implemented delivery system for incentivizing consumer activity and managing transactions.
The limitations of targeting incentives to consumers based on location, managing transactions, and facilitating/recording of transactions and incentives are as drafted, concepts which are directed towards commercial/legal interactions. As discussed in Affinity Labs of Tex. v. Amazon.com, the concept of targeting content to particular users including utilizing specific targeting criteria such as location is abstract, wherein providing targeted marketing offers are also marketing activities. The concept of managing and recording donation activities are also considered a commercial interaction similar to Ultramercial, wherein consumer activities are tracked and benefits are provided including the recording of the benefits. The concept of soliciting survey response and utilizing incentives is further a commercial interaction similar to OIP Technology and Ultramercial. As such, the claimed invention is directed towards a certain method of organizing human activity, specifically marketing activities and fundamental economic principles.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim only recites generic computers including servers and terminals. The generic computers are comprised of generic computer components (as discussed in originally filed specification ¶0122) are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function of detecting new information, sending information, receiving information, performing calculations, and recording/storing information) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using the generic computers to perform the steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible.
The dependent claims are further directed towards the judicial exception without significantly more. The dependent claims provide limitations on additional abstract rules (such as claim 2), well-understood routine and conventional functions of network communication (such as claim 3), and further defining abstract elements of consumer feedback (such as claim 4). These are still directed towards the judicial exception as these further define the abstract elements or are well-understood, routine, and conventional. They are not significantly more as they do not further integrate the judicial exception into a practical application and the additional element amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. The dependent claims is not patent eligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 11-12, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tietzen et al. (US 20190392469 A1) (hereafter Tietzen), in view of Dyor et al. (US 20130097001 A1) (hereafter Dyor), in view of Simon (US 20210374786 A1) (hereafter Simon).
As per claim 1:
A computer-implemented incentive delivery system comprising:
a proximity sensing system associated with a merchant location and configured to detect a web- enabled mobile computing device corresponding to a targeted consumer when the device is within a predetermined geographic proximity of the merchant location, the proximity sensing system utilizing at least one of GPS data, latitude/longitude coordinates, postal code matching, navigation-time calculations accounting for real-time traffic conditions, or wireless beacon signals: (See Tietzen ¶0154, “Still other embodiments of various implementations may be operable to recognize the location of a member at a point of time. For example, a GPS system on a mobile device in the possession of a member or other participant may send location information to the marketing program. In this embodiment the marketing program may provide a member with information regarding merchant incentives pertaining to the location of the member at a point in time. (For example, a member who travels on vacation to New York City may be recognized by the marketing program as existing in New York City because the marketing program can read the location of the member based on a GPS feature or application linked to the smart phone in the possession of the member. The member may then submit a query to the marketing program requesting information about merchant restaurants local to the location of the member in New York City at the time of submitting the request. The marketing program may generate a map showing merchant restaurants in the vicinity of the location of the member submitting the request in New York City. The function and capabilities of the map may be as are described above.)” See also Tietzen ¶0055, “Yet another such comparison can be whether the merchant's place of business and its customer's residence are physically proximate within a predetermined factor by any of a variety of measures or combinations thereof. For example, latitude and longitude coordinates might be known for both the merchant's place of business and the residence of its customer. These coordinates can be used to determine whether the linear distance there between is within a predetermined distance to ascertain whether or not the merchant and its customer share the same local community.” Tietzen discloses utilizing GPS data to determine user device location in relation to a merchant location.)
a loyalty system server in communication with the proximity sensing system and with the web- enabled mobile computing device, the loyalty system server configured to automatically transmit, in real time upon detection by the proximity sensing system, a sponsored offer from the merchant to the web- enabled mobile computing device, the sponsored offer including a merchant binding obligation to make a donation to an affinity entity selected by the consumer via the device: (See Tietzen ¶0095, “As shown in FIG. 4, an incentive, in this instance in the form of a discount on a future transaction with the merchant, is seen on a display screen that is rendered on a member's communication means 20, which may be a web-enabled mobile computing device (e.g., a smart phone). The rendered incentive is the result of the member having followed a unique URL that was sent to the member's device in a communication. The member can take advantage of the incentive at the webpage of the merchant by redeeming the incentive to obtain a discount on an e-commerce transaction at the merchant's webpage. Other than as shown in FIG. 4, communication means 20 can be a PDA, a tablet, a laptop, or other type of communication means, whereby details may be uploaded and downloaded from the loyalty engine. For example, the system may be linked to a smart phone belonging to a member, whereby incentives may be disseminated to the member via the smart phone. In this manner a coupon 22 may be disseminated to a member and communicated by the loyalty engine to the member's smart phone. The coupon may further include a bar code, a unique reward identifier, or other intelligent information.” Tietzen discloses the concept of a loyalty system providing offers to user device. See also Tietzen ¶0090, “The incentive, once accessed by the member following the unique URL (e.g., the member uses a browser to click on a URL on a webpage served to the member's browser), may have many different forms, such as a sweepstake entry, a discount, a donation to a charity, rewards points, a coupon, or any other incentive form or combination of incentive forms (e.g., a donation to a charity and a discount, etc.) By way of example, any of the foregoing incentives may be accredited to the member by the data mining tool 14, the loyalty engine, and/or the transaction linking utility 16 having detected that the member followed the URL. Alternatively, any of the foregoing incentives may be accredited to the member only after a detection that the member: (i) followed the URL which served a webpage for the merchant at which the member can conduct an online transaction for goods and/or services with the merchant; and (ii) conducted an online transaction at the webpage of the merchant to purchase goods and/or services from the merchant,” Tietzen discloses the offer to include donation obligations.)
an acquired-account payment processing system including a point-of-sale (POS) terminal at the merchant location, an acquirer, a transaction handler, and an issuer, the acquired-account payment processing system configured to authorize a consumer purchase transaction initiated at the POS terminal using an account associated with the web-enabled mobile computing device: and (See Tietzen ¶0046, “ The merchant, who may be operating a brick and mortar store in the community where the community resident resides, inputs data about the transaction on the community resident's account into a Point of Service terminal (POS) 106. The POS, for example, can be a cash register, a web-enabled mobile device (e.g., a tablet computing device), etc. The POS 106 transmits the input data, as part of an authorization request in an authorization cycle for the transaction, to an acquirer 110 for the merchant. Acquirer 110, who can be just one of many entities in the global Acquired Account Payment Processing System 105, sends the authorization request through a payment-processing network 112, as facilitated by one or more transaction handlers, for example Visa Net, to the issuer 112 who issued the account to the community resident. In response to the authorization request, the issuer 112 sends an authorization response at least of portion of which is ultimately sent for delivery back to the merchant's POS 106 by transmissions made in backward directions through the payment-processing network 112 via the merchant's acquirer 110.” Tietzen discloses acquired account payment processing system.)
a Donation Audit Web Service comprising one or more servers executing a rules engine and in networked communication with the acquired-account payment processing system, the Donation Audit Web Service configured to: (See Tietzen ¶0075, “Also shown in FIG. 2 are one or more Affinity Entities (k) 298 and a Donation Audit Web Service 214 that implement processes by which donations to the one or more Affinity Entities (k) 298 from various donors, for instance, any Issuer (j) 204, a Merchant (m) 210, any Acquirer (i) 206, and the Transaction Handler 202. Donation Audit Web Service 214 implements processes for the auditing of donations to the one or more Affinity Entities (k) 298. The Donation Audit Web Service 214 has access to information resources within the following databases: Account Holder databases 278; Merchant databases 280; Transaction databases 282; Affinity Entity Donations Payable databases 286; Affinity Entity Donations Paid databases 288; Affinity Entity databases 290, Issuer Bank databases 292, and Acquirer Bank databases 294.” Tietzen discloses a donation audit web service.)
(i) receive, in real time, transaction authorization response data from the acquired- account payment processing system, (See Tietzen ¶0083, “In various implementations, Donation Audit Web Service 214 seen in FIG. 2 receives information that confirms such a timely transaction between the customer and the merchant by way of receiving information derived from an authorization response for the transaction.” Tietzen discloses receiving transaction authorization response.)
(ii) calculate a donation amount according to merchant-defined business rules stored in a merchant database accessed by the rules engine, (See Tietzen ¶0084, “Once confirmation has been received by Donation Audit Web Service 214 that a timely transaction has taken place been the merchant who made the offer and the customer who selected and confirmed that offer, a calculation is made of an amount of a donation that is to be made by the merchant-offeror according to terms of the offer.” Tietzen discloses calculating a donation amount based on rules of the offer.)
the rules including at least one of a fixed percentage of the transaction amount, a threshold-based amount, or a community-participation multiplier: and (See Tietzen ¶0066, “Note that terms and conditions of the transaction may differ from that of the offer presented by the community resident at the local merchant's brick and mortar store. As such, the merchant's offer to donate might not be specific to a particular good or service, but can be specific as to the entire transaction between the merchant and its customer. By way of example as to this type of offer specificity, the offer may obligate the merchant to make a donation of a certain percentage of the entire currency amount of transaction, or the offer may obligate the merchant to make a donation only if the transaction is conducted at a certain time of day or on a particular day of the week, or only if the currency amount of the transaction exceeds a predetermined amount, or a combination of the foregoing. Other conditions are also permissible.” Tietzen discloses the rules of the merchant offer to include transaction amount percentage and threshold amount.)
(iii) record the calculated donation in at least one of a transactions database, an affinity-entity donations-payable database, and an affinity-entity donations-paid database for subsequent audit compliance, (See Tietzen ¶0075, “Also shown in FIG. 2 are one or more Affinity Entities (k) 298 and a Donation Audit Web Service 214 that implement processes by which donations to the one or more Affinity Entities (k) 298 from various donors, for instance, any Issuer (j) 204, a Merchant (m) 210, any Acquirer (i) 206, and the Transaction Handler 202. Donation Audit Web Service 214 implements processes for the auditing of donations to the one or more Affinity Entities (k) 298. The Donation Audit Web Service 214 has access to information resources within the following databases: Account Holder databases 278; Merchant databases 280; Transaction databases 282; Affinity Entity Donations Payable databases 286; Affinity Entity Donations Paid databases 288; Affinity Entity databases 290, Issuer Bank databases 292, and Acquirer Bank databases 294.” Tietzen discloses the concept of recording transaction and donation information.)
wherein, upon confirmation of transaction authorization by the Donation Audit Web Service, the loyalty system server automatically transmits an electronic interactive survey to the web-enabled mobile computing device, the survey including at least one sponsored market-research question, and wherein completion of the survey by the consumer via the device triggers recording of an additional donor contribution to the consumer-selected affinity entity. (See Tietzen ¶0187, “After then member 120 has following the unique URL, the member 120 may also conduct an e-commerce transaction 134 with the merchant 140, the occurrence of which will be detected by a transaction linking utility. After the member 120 has been detected to have conducted the e-commerce transaction 134 with the merchant 140, the member 120 may be provided with, and gives a response to, a post transaction survey 148. A marketing engine 136 may use the post transaction survey 148, in conjunction with other information, to generate one or more reports 142 which may be provided to one or more merchants 140. The post transaction survey 148 may also be utilized with other information to generate incentive suggestions 122, which may lead to the generation of a merchant incentive 124, such as a discount, that may be approved 126 by a merchant.” Tietzen discloses the concept of further providing a post transaction survey.)
Although Tietzen discloses the above-enclosed invention, Tietzen fails to explicitly disclose the loyalty server to serve the offer based on proximity.
However Dyor as shown, which talks about a dynamic loyalty service, teaches the concept of a loyalty system to serve offers based on proximity in real time.
a loyalty system server in communication with the proximity sensing system and with the web- enabled mobile computing device, the loyalty system server configured to automatically transmit, in real time upon detection by the proximity sensing system, a sponsored offer from the merchant to the web- enabled mobile computing device, the sponsored offer including a merchant binding obligation to make a donation to an affinity entity selected by the consumer via the device: (See Dyor ¶0019, “In an alternative implementation, the dynamic loyalty service system 100 also collects and uses other real-time information, such as weather conditions, proximity of the customers to the restaurant 102, etc., in revising the promotions and the recommendations. For example, if the dynamic loyalty service system 100 determines that customer John is near the restaurant, the dynamic loyalty service system 100 revises the communication plan 118 to generate a communication message to John to invite him for the meal during the current time segment with a promotion to entice him. Similarly, if the dynamic loyalty service system 100 receives information from a Facebook.TM. page of a customer that the customer is inviting his friends for drinks, the dynamic loyalty service system 100 updates the communication plan 118 to recommend sending an invitation to that customer with a promotion for a group outing to the restaurant 102.” Dyor teaches the concept of a loyalty system targeting offers in real time based on proximity of user devices to merchant locations.)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have utilized the teachings of Dyor with the invention of Tietzen. As shown, Tietzen discloses the concept of tracking user location for targeting offers and the loyalty system to provide the offers. Dyor further teaches the concept of utilizing location/proximity data in real time by the loyalty system. Dyor teaches this concept to further adapt the loyalty system to real time conditions of the business and further incentivize consumers (See Dyor ¶0001). Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have utilized the teachings of Dyor for loyalty system to target offers in real time based on conditions including proximity.
Although the combination of Tietzen and Dyor discloses the above-enclosed invention, the combination fails to explicitly disclose the survey to be a follow up to a first transaction including additional offer.
However Simon as shown, which talks about real time consumer feedback, teaches the concept of providing a survey including additional incentive offers.
wherein, upon confirmation of transaction authorization by the Donation Audit Web Service, the loyalty system server automatically transmits an electronic interactive survey to the web-enabled mobile computing device, the survey including at least one sponsored market-research question, and wherein completion of the survey by the consumer via the device triggers recording of an additional donor contribution to the consumer-selected affinity entity. (See Simon ¶0104, “At step 906, a customer satisfaction survey is sent to a wireless device of the consumer associated with the digital wallet. According to some embodiments, the satisfaction survey may include a simple star rating for the digital wallet transaction. The incentive offer of step 904, according to some embodiments, is intended to incentivize a response by the consumer to the customer satisfaction survey.” Simon teaches the concept of providing a survey in response to transaction confirmation, wherein the survey is also associated with additional incentives.)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have utilized the teachings of Simon with the combination of Tietzen and Dyor. As shown, the combination discloses the concept of managing incentives including providing incentives to appropriate parties based on transaction completion and providing post transaction survey. Simon further teaches the concept of managing and providing post transaction survey including additional incentives for completion of the survey. Simon teaches this concept to further collect particular feedback from consumer for a transaction/experience with the merchant including addressing the issue of feedback requests being ignored (See Simon ¶0005-¶0006). Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have utilized the teachings of Simon to further collect customized feedback from consumer.
As per claim 2:
The method computer-implemented incentive delivery system as defined in Claim 1, wherein the proximity sensing system determines shared community status between the merchant and the consumer using a hybrid algorithm that combines linear distance, navigation time (walking or automobile), political division boundaries, postal codes, and population-density thresholds. (See Tietzen ¶0059, “The local community corresponding to that of the merchant and its customer, and separations there between (if any), can be determined from any combination of linear distance, mode-specific navigational transportation travel time, political separation, postal designation, and/or hybrid algorithm that takes into considers geographic barrier features such as rivers, cliffs, and highways, cultural features such as boundaries of identified people groups (e.g., tribes, first nation people, etc.), land ownership such as subdivisions, housing projects, cooperatives, planned communities, military installations, governmental owned and leased properties, etc. Given the foregoing, an algorithm might find that the merchant and its customer are members of the same community, not members of the same community, or are both members of more than one of the same communities as determined by the algorithm.” See also Tietzen ¶0068, “the calculated distance and/or time for the customer to navigate, using a known mode of transportation, from a geographic location associated with the customer (e.g., home location, work location, vacation location, etc.) to the merchant's brick and mortar store of the POS 106, for instance, by walking, bicycling, automobile and/or mass transit;” Tietzen discloses the concept of utilizing a hybrid model to determine community status.)
As per claim 4:
The computer-implemented incentive delivery system as defined in Claim 1 wherein the electronic interactive survey includes at least one of a rating-scale question, a yes/no question, or an open-ended comment field limited to two hundred characters, and (See Simon ¶0076, “After payment is completed, according to some embodiments, the user is presented with screen 504. Interface 508 presents, as an example, a survey question in the simple and familiar “star rating” format. The commonly used “star rating” format is merely exemplary, and numerous other simple rating systems are available, as would be apparent to one having ordinary skill in the art. Field 510 according to some embodiments allows the user to type a message to the retailer if desired.” Simon teaches the concept of the survey to take different formats including a rating scale and open ended comments.)
wherein survey response data is automatically fed into an artificial-intelligence recommendation engine of the loyalty system server for personalization of future sponsored offers. (See Simon ¶0038, “Modern artificial intelligence and machine learning bring exciting new technical, operational and heuristic insights and possibilities to the fields of discussion. It should also be understood that, as part of the portions of this disclosure related to data collection and analysis (e.g. collecting consumer feedback, building profiles of actual or desired consumers, identifying purchasing trends, etc.) that various artificial intelligence and/or machine learning principles, as would be apparent to one having ordinary skill in those fields, may be applied to determine the methods of and/or enhance the data analysis and/or uncover additional insights. As one example, machine learning may be employed to discern the likelihood of a particular incentive offer resulting in a specific consumer or type of consumer participating in giving feedback about a transaction. Such a determination may be made using a variety of input factors, such as the past behavior of a specific consumer and/or consumers sharing particular characteristics, including derived or inferred characteristics. In some embodiments, various parameters may, in general, be ranked according to an expected likelihood of compatibility. For example, all available incentives could be ranked for likelihood of effectiveness at the time of a transaction based on numerous factors including, but not limited to, demographic and psychographic characteristics of the consumer, geographical location of the point-of-sale, time of day, type of goods or services involved in the transaction, etc.” Simon teaches the concept of utilizing feedback to further personalize future incentives using a machine learning system.)
As per claim 11:
A non-transitory computer-readable medium or media having stored thereon computer readable instructions for configuring the computer-implemented incentive delivery system as defined in Claim 1. (See Tietzen claim 20, “A non-transient computer readable medium comprising software which, when executed by hardware, performs the method of claim 19.” Tietzen discloses a non-transitory computer readable medium for carrying instructions for execution.)
As per claim 12:
A computer-implemented incentive delivery system comprising:
a first system associated with a merchant location and configured to detect a web-enabled mobile computing device corresponding to a targeted consumer when the device is within a predetermined geographic proximity of the merchant location, the proximity sensing system utilizing at least one of GPS data, latitude/longitude coordinates, postal code matching, navigation-time calculations accounting for real-time traffic conditions, or wireless beacon signals; (See Tietzen ¶0154, “Still other embodiments of various implementations may be operable to recognize the location of a member at a point of time. For example, a GPS system on a mobile device in the possession of a member or other participant may send location information to the marketing program. In this embodiment the marketing program may provide a member with information regarding merchant incentives pertaining to the location of the member at a point in time. (For example, a member who travels on vacation to New York City may be recognized by the marketing program as existing in New York City because the marketing program can read the location of the member based on a GPS feature or application linked to the smart phone in the possession of the member. The member may then submit a query to the marketing program requesting information about merchant restaurants local to the location of the member in New York City at the time of submitting the request. The marketing program may generate a map showing merchant restaurants in the vicinity of the location of the member submitting the request in New York City. The function and capabilities of the map may be as are described above.)” See also Tietzen ¶0055, “Yet another such comparison can be whether the merchant's place of business and its customer's residence are physically proximate within a predetermined factor by any of a variety of measures or combinations thereof. For example, latitude and longitude coordinates might be known for both the merchant's place of business and the residence of its customer. These coordinates can be used to determine whether the linear distance there between is within a predetermined distance to ascertain whether or not the merchant and its customer share the same local community.” Tietzen discloses utilizing GPS data to determine user device location in relation to a merchant location.)
a second system in communication with the first system and with the web-enabled mobile computing device, the second system server configured to automatically transmit, in real time upon detection by the first system, a sponsored offer from the merchant to the web-enabled mobile computing device, the sponsored offer including a merchant binding obligation to make a donation to an affinity entity selected by the consumer via the device; (See Tietzen ¶0095, “As shown in FIG. 4, an incentive, in this instance in the form of a discount on a future transaction with the merchant, is seen on a display screen that is rendered on a member's communication means 20, which may be a web-enabled mobile computing device (e.g., a smart phone). The rendered incentive is the result of the member having followed a unique URL that was sent to the member's device in a communication. The member can take advantage of the incentive at the webpage of the merchant by redeeming the incentive to obtain a discount on an e-commerce transaction at the merchant's webpage. Other than as shown in FIG. 4, communication means 20 can be a PDA, a tablet, a laptop, or other type of communication means, whereby details may be uploaded and downloaded from the loyalty engine. For example, the system may be linked to a smart phone belonging to a member, whereby incentives may be disseminated to the member via the smart phone. In this manner a coupon 22 may be disseminated to a member and communicated by the loyalty engine to the member's smart phone. The coupon may further include a bar code, a unique reward identifier, or other intelligent information.” Tietzen discloses the concept of a loyalty system providing offers to user device. See also Tietzen ¶0090, “The incentive, once accessed by the member following the unique URL (e.g., the member uses a browser to click on a URL on a webpage served to the member's browser), may have many different forms, such as a sweepstake entry, a discount, a donation to a charity, rewards points, a coupon, or any other incentive form or combination of incentive forms (e.g., a donation to a charity and a discount, etc.) By way of example, any of the foregoing incentives may be accredited to the member by the data mining tool 14, the loyalty engine, and/or the transaction linking utility 16 having detected that the member followed the URL. Alternatively, any of the foregoing incentives may be accredited to the member only after a detection that the member: (i) followed the URL which served a webpage for the merchant at which the member can conduct an online transaction for goods and/or services with the merchant; and (ii) conducted an online transaction at the webpage of the merchant to purchase goods and/or services from the merchant,” Tietzen discloses the offer to include donation obligations.)
a third system including a point-of-sale (POS) terminal at the merchant location, an acquirer, a transaction handler, and an issuer, the acquired-account payment processing system configured to authorize a consumer purchase transaction initiated at the POS terminal using an account associated with the web-enabled mobile computing device; and (See Tietzen ¶0046, “ The merchant, who may be operating a brick and mortar store in the community where the community resident resides, inputs data about the transaction on the community resident's account into a Point of Service terminal (POS) 106. The POS, for example, can be a cash register, a web-enabled mobile device (e.g., a tablet computing device), etc. The POS 106 transmits the input data, as part of an authorization request in an authorization cycle for the transaction, to an acquirer 110 for the merchant. Acquirer 110, who can be just one of many entities in the global Acquired Account Payment Processing System 105, sends the authorization request through a payment-processing network 112, as facilitated by one or more transaction handlers, for example Visa Net, to the issuer 112 who issued the account to the community resident. In response to the authorization request, the issuer 112 sends an authorization response at least of portion of which is ultimately sent for delivery back to the merchant's POS 106 by transmissions made in backward directions through the payment-processing network 112 via the merchant's acquirer 110.” Tietzen discloses acquired account payment processing system.)
a fourth system comprising one or more servers executing a rules engine and in networked communication with the third system, the fourth system configured to: (See Tietzen ¶0075, “Also shown in FIG. 2 are one or more Affinity Entities (k) 298 and a Donation Audit Web Service 214 that implement processes by which donations to the one or more Affinity Entities (k) 298 from various donors, for instance, any Issuer (j) 204, a Merchant (m) 210, any Acquirer (i) 206, and the Transaction Handler 202. Donation Audit Web Service 214 implements processes for the auditing of donations to the one or more Affinity Entities (k) 298. The Donation Audit Web Service 214 has access to information resources within the following databases: Account Holder databases 278; Merchant databases 280; Transaction databases 282; Affinity Entity Donations Payable databases 286; Affinity Entity Donations Paid databases 288; Affinity Entity databases 290, Issuer Bank databases 292, and Acquirer Bank databases 294.” Tietzen discloses a donation audit web service.)
(i) receive, in real time, transaction authorization response data from the third system, (See Tietzen ¶0083, “In various implementations, Donation Audit Web Service 214 seen in FIG. 2 receives information that confirms such a timely transaction between the customer and the merchant by way of receiving information derived from an authorization response for the transaction.” Tietzen discloses receiving transaction authorization response.)
(ii) calculate a donation amount according to merchant-defined business rules stored in a merchant database accessed by the rules engine, (See Tietzen ¶0084, “Once confirmation has been received by Donation Audit Web Service 214 that a timely transaction has taken place been the merchant who made the offer and the customer who selected and confirmed that offer, a calculation is made of an amount of a donation that is to be made by the merchant-offeror according to terms of the offer.” Tietzen discloses calculating a donation amount based on rules of the offer.)
the rules including at least one of a fixed percentage of the transaction amount, a threshold-based amount, or a community-participation multiplier and (See Tietzen ¶0066, “Note that terms and conditions of the transaction may differ from that of the offer presented by the community resident at the local merchant's brick and mortar store. As such, the merchant's offer to donate might not be specific to a particular good or service, but can be specific as to the entire transaction between the merchant and its customer. By way of example as to this type of offer specificity, the offer may obligate the merchant to make a donation of a certain percentage of the entire currency amount of transaction, or the offer may obligate the merchant to make a donation only if the transaction is conducted at a certain time of day or on a particular day of the week, or only if the currency amount of the transaction exceeds a predetermined amount, or a combination of the foregoing. Other conditions are also permissible.” Tietzen discloses the rules of the merchant offer to include transaction amount percentage and threshold amount.)
(iii) record the calculated donation in at least one of a transactions database, an affinity- entity donations-payable database, and an affinity-entity donations-paid database for subsequent audit compliance, (See Tietzen ¶0075, “Also shown in FIG. 2 are one or more Affinity Entities (k) 298 and a Donation Audit Web Service 214 that implement processes by which donations to the one or more Affinity Entities (k) 298 from various donors, for instance, any Issuer (j) 204, a Merchant (m) 210, any Acquirer (i) 206, and the Transaction Handler 202. Donation Audit Web Service 214 implements processes for the auditing of donations to the one or more Affinity Entities (k) 298. The Donation Audit Web Service 214 has access to information resources within the following databases: Account Holder databases 278; Merchant databases 280; Transaction databases 282; Affinity Entity Donations Payable databases 286; Affinity Entity Donations Paid databases 288; Affinity Entity databases 290, Issuer Bank databases 292, and Acquirer Bank databases 294.” Tietzen discloses the concept of recording transaction and donation information.)
wherein, upon confirmation of transaction authorization by the fourth system, the second system automatically transmits an electronic interactive survey to the web-enabled mobile computing device, the survey including at least one sponsored market-research question, and wherein completion of the survey by the consumer via the device triggers recording of an additional donor contribution to the consumer-selected affinity entity. (See Tietzen ¶0187, “After then member 120 has following the unique URL, the member 120 may also conduct an e-commerce transaction 134 with the merchant 140, the occurrence of which will be detected by a transaction linking utility. After the member 120 has been detected to have conducted the e-commerce transaction 134 with the merchant 140, the member 120 may be provided with, and gives a response to, a post transaction survey 148. A marketing engine 136 may use the post transaction survey 148, in conjunction with other information, to generate one or more reports 142 which may be provided to one or more merchants 140. The post transaction survey 148 may also be utilized with other information to generate incentive suggestions 122, which may lead to the generation of a merchant incentive 124, such as a discount, that may be approved 126 by a merchant.” Tietzen discloses the concept of further providing a post transaction survey.)
Although Tietzen discloses the above-enclosed invention, Tietzen fails to explicitly disclose the loyalty server to serve the offer based on proximity.
However Dyor as shown, which talks about a dynamic loyalty service, teaches the concept of a loyalty system to serve offers based on proximity in real time.
a second system in communication with the first system and with the web-enabled mobile computing device, the second system server configured to automatically transmit, in real time upon detection by the first system, a sponsored offer from the merchant to the web-enabled mobile computing device, the sponsored offer including a merchant binding obligation to make a donation to an affinity entity selected by the consumer via the device; (See Dyor ¶0019, “In an alternative implementation, the dynamic loyalty service system 100 also collects and uses other real-time information, such as weather conditions, proximity of the customers to the restaurant 102, etc., in revising the promotions and the recommendations. For example, if the dynamic loyalty service system 100 determines that customer John is near the restaurant, the dynamic loyalty service system 100 revises the communication plan 118 to generate a communication message to John to invite him for the meal during the current time segment with a promotion to entice him. Similarly, if the dynamic loyalty service system 100 receives information from a Facebook.TM. page of a customer that the customer is inviting his friends for drinks, the dynamic loyalty service system 100 updates the communication plan 118 to recommend sending an invitation to that customer with a promotion for a group outing to the restaurant 102.” Dyor teaches the concept of a loyalty system targeting offers in real time based on proximity of user devices to merchant locations.)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have utilized the teachings of Dyor with the invention of Tietzen. As shown, Tietzen discloses the concept of tracking user location for targeting offers and the loyalty system to provide the offers. Dyor further teaches the concept of utilizing location/proximity data in real time by the loyalty system. Dyor teaches this concept to further adapt the loyalty system to real time conditions of the business and further incentivize consumers (See Dyor ¶0001). Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have utilized the teachings of Dyor for loyalty system to target offers in real time based on conditions including proximity.
Although the combination of Tietzen and Dyor discloses the above-enclosed invention, the combination fails to explicitly disclose the survey to be a follow up to a first transaction including additional offer.
However Simon as shown, which talks about real time consumer feedback, teaches the concept of providing a survey including additional incentive offers.
wherein, upon confirmation of transaction authorization by the fourth system, the second system automatically transmits an electronic interactive survey to the web-enabled mobile computing device, the survey including at least one sponsored market-research question, and wherein completion of the survey by the consumer via the device triggers recording of an additional donor contribution to the consumer-selected affinity entity. (See Simon ¶0104, “At step 906, a customer satisfaction survey is sent to a wireless device of the consumer associated with the digital wallet. According to some embodiments, the satisfaction survey may include a simple star rating for the digital wallet transaction. The incentive offer of step 904, according to some embodiments, is intended to incentivize a response by the consumer to the customer satisfaction survey.” Simon teaches the concept of providing a survey in response to transaction confirmation, wherein the survey is also associated with additional incentives.)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have utilized the teachings of Simon with the combination of Tietzen and Dyor. As shown, the combination discloses the concept of managing incentives including providing incentives to appropriate parties based on transaction completion and providing post transaction survey. Simon further teaches the concept of managing and providing post transaction survey including additional incentives for completion of the survey. Simon teaches this concept to further collect particular feedback from consumer for a transaction/experience with the merchant including addressing the issue of feedback requests being ignored (See Simon ¶0005-¶0006). Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have utilized the teachings of Simon to further collect customized feedback from consumer.
As per claim 20:
A non-transitory computer-readable medium or media having stored thereon computer readable instructions for configuring the computer-implemented incentive delivery system a computer to perform the method as defined in Claim 12. (See Tietzen claim 20, “A non-transient computer readable medium comprising software which, when executed by hardware, performs the method of claim 19.” Tietzen discloses a non-transitory computer readable medium for carrying instructions for execution.)
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tietzen et al. (US 20190392469 A1) (hereafter Tietzen), in view of Dyor et al. (US 20130097001 A1) (hereafter Dyor), in view of Simon (US 20210374786 A1) (hereafter Simon), in view of Koval et al. (US 20190260204 A1) (hereafter Koval)***
As per claim 3:
The computer-implemented incentive delivery system as defined in Claim 1 wherein the Donation Audit Web Service retains the derived donation data in a secure transactions database for subsequent audit purposes to insure compliance by the merchant with its donation commitments, (See Tietzen ¶0050, “Web Service 100 retains the derived donation for subsequent audit purposes to insure compliance by each community merchant in its donation commitments to each of the one or more affinity entities or charities. The Web Service 100 may transmit a message containing notice of a donation, or the particularly derived donation, as shown at reference numerals 118-120 to respective logical addresses of the obligated merchant 106, one of more community resident/account holder designed affinity entities 122, and the community resident/account holder—and/or to respective agents thereof. The terms and conditions that obligate the merchant-offeror to make a donation may, but need not, include discounts, rebates, or other monetary or non-monetary incentives. As such, the community resident/account holder is incentivized to purchase from the merchant's store, inter alia, by the merchant's agreement to donate to one of more community resident/account holder designed affinity entities 122.” Tietzen discloses retaining donation data in a database for audit purposes.)
Although the combination of Tietzen, Dyor, and Simon discloses the above-enclosed invention, the combination fails to explicitly disclose the data transmission protocol.
However Koval as shown, which talks about utilizing machine learning to analyze metering data, teaches the concept of utilizing particular protocols for data transmission.
the data transmitted via at least one of HTTPS or SFTP protocols. (See Koval ¶0137, “The original FTP specification is an inherently insecure method of transferring files because there is no method specified for transferring data in an encrypted fashion. This means that under most network configurations, user names, passwords, FTP commands and transferred files can be “sniffed” or viewed by anyone on the same network using a packet sniffer. This is a problem common to many Internet protocol specifications written prior to the creation of SSL such as HTTP, SMTP and Telnet. The common solution to this problem is to use simple password protection or simple encryption schemes, or more sophisticated approaches using either SFTP (Secure Shell (SSH) File Transfer Protocol), or FTPS (FTP over SSL), which adds SSL or TLS (Transport Layer Security) encryption to FTP as specified in RFC 4217. The inventors have contemplated the use of each of these schemes in the IEDs described above.” Koval teaches the concept of utilizing HTTPS or SFTP for secure data transmission.)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have utilized the teachings of Koval with the combination of Tietzen, Dyor, and Simon. As shown, the combination discloses the concept of utilizing network communication and sending/receiving information over a network between different parties. Koval further teaches the concept of securing network communications using particular known protocols (See Koval ¶0137). Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have utilized the teachings of Koval to further secure network communications.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-4, 11-12, 20 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.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-4, 11-12, 20 have been considered but are moot as the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection has been updated as discussed above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Gold et al. (US 20180227735 A1), which talks about proximity based reward.
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 VINCENT M CAO whose telephone number is (571)270-5598. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 11-7.
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, ILANA SPAR can be reached at (571) 270-7537. 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.
/VINCENT M CAO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3622
Prosecution Insights