DETAILED ACTION
Introduction
This Office action is responsive to the communications filed January 23,2026. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
1. Applicant has amended claims 8-12, thereby overcoming the 35 USC 112(a) rejection of the claims.
2. As per the 35 USC 101 rejection, Applicant asserts that the claims are not directed to an abstract idea and that the claim recites “an improved process for providing merchants with real-time funds availability for payment card account system transactions featuring a bridging network computer.”
However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. As indicated in the Office action, the claims are directed to the abstract idea of transmitting instructions to credit a holding account and to transfers funds, which is categorized under certain methods of organizing human activity. Additionally, the algorithm to improve the technology is not described in the claims/specification.
Further, Applicant requested evidence to support a finding that the claimed features are “well-understood, routine, and conventional activity;” however, this phrase was not applied to the rejection.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
In the instant case, claims 1-6 and 13-16 are directed to a system. Claims 7-12 and 17-20 are directed to a device. Therefore, these claims fall within the four statutory categories of invention.
For example, claim 1 recites an abstract idea of transmitting instructions to credit a holding account and to transfer funds. The claim under its broadest reasonable interpretation recites limitations grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The certain methods of organizing human activity abstract idea grouping is defined as concepts related to fundamental economic principles or practices, commercial or legal interactions including agreements in the form of contracts, legal obligations, advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors, and business relations. See MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2), subsection II. The claim limitations reciting the abstract idea are grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas as they relate to transmitting instructions to credit a holding account and to transfer funds. More specifically, the following the bolded claim elements recite additional elements while the other claim elements recite the abstract idea. according to MPEP 2106.04(a).
A system for providing merchants with real-time funds availability for payment card account system transactions comprising:
a bridging network computer comprising a processor operably coupled to a storage device and to a communication device;
a payment network operably connected to the bridging network computer;
a merchant acquirer bank computer of a merchant operably connected to the payment network; and a plurality of issuer bank computers operably connected to the bridging network computer and to the payment network; wherein the storage device of the bridging network computer stores processor-executable instructions which when executed cause the processor to:
receive, via the communication device from the payment network, a payment card account system transaction request which includes data elements comprising at least a transaction amount, and wherein the payment card account system transaction request was initiated by acceptance of a payment card account transaction by the merchant;
determine that the merchant selected electronic funds transfer (EFT) settlement for the accepted payment card account transaction;
determine, by running a rule administration application program stored in the storage device, that the payment card account transaction is eligible for real-time EFT settlement; determine, concerning the payment card account transaction, that both the merchant acquirer bank associated with the merchant acquirer bank computer and an issuer of the customer's payment card account are participants in a real-time EFT settlement arrangement; and
transmit, via the communication device to an issuer bank computer of the plurality of issuer bank computers in response to the determinations by the processor, instructions to credit a holding account and to execute via an EFT transaction request a transfer of funds in real-time for the transaction amount to the merchant acquirer bank computer to benefit the merchant.
Independent claims 7, 13, and 17 recite similar language.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because, when analyzed under prong two of step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test (See MPEP 2106.04(d)), the additional element(s) of the claim(s) such as the bridging network computer, processor, storage device, communication device, payment network, merchant acquirer bank computer, issuer bank computers, are merely used as tools to perform an abstract idea and/or generally link the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment. Specifically, these additional elements perform the steps or functions of transmitting instructions to credit a holding account and to transfer funds. Viewed as a whole, the use of bridging network computer, processor, storage device, communication device, payment network, merchant acquirer bank computer, issuer bank computers as tools to implement the abstract idea and/or generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it requires no more than a computer or computer networks performing functions that correspond to acts required to carry out the abstract idea. The additional elements do not involve improvements to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field (MPEP 2106.05(a)), and the claims do not apply or use the abstract idea in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception (MPEP 2106.05(e) and Vanda Memo). Therefore, the claims do not, for example, purport to improve the functioning of a computer. Nor do they effect an improvement in any other technology or technical field. Accordingly, the additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and the claims are directed to an abstract idea.
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because, when analyzed under step 2B of the Alice/Mayo test (See MPEP 2106.05), the additional element(s) of the bridging network computer, processor, storage device, communication device, payment network, merchant acquirer bank computer, issuer bank computers to perform the steps amounts to no more than using generic hardware or software to automate and/or implement the abstract idea of transmitting instructions to credit a holding account and to transfer funds. Viewed as a whole, the combination of elements recited in the claims merely recite the concept of transmitting instructions to credit a holding account and to transfer funds. Therefore, the use of these additional elements does no more than employ the computer as a tool to automate and/or implement the abstract idea. The use of a computer or processor to merely automate and/or implement the abstract idea cannot provide significantly more than the abstract idea itself (MPEP 2106.05 (f) & (h)). Therefore, the claim is not patent eligible.
The dependent claims further describe the abstract idea such as receive, via the communication device from the issuer bank computer, a message that indicates failure of the EFT transaction request; and route a payment card account system transaction authorization request message to the issuer computer.
The dependent claims do not include additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or that provide significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the dependent claims are also not patent eligible.
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 JALATEE WORJLOH whose telephone number is (571)272-6714. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6:00am-2:00pm.
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, John Hayes can be reached at (571) 272-6708. 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.
/Jalatee Worjloh/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3697
Prosecution Insights