DETAILED ACTION
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 Objections
2. Claims 1-2, 5, 7-9, 11, 14, 16 and 19-20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1 line 13, “the transaction” should read “the electronic transaction” because the transaction is previously mentioned as an electronic transaction in line 1 and in line 7, “transaction metadata” should read “the transaction metadata”.
Appropriate correction is required.
In claim 2 line 1, “the first messages” should read “the first message”.
Appropriate correction is required.
In claim 5 line 1, “the first messages” should read “the first message”.
Appropriate correction is required.
In claim 7 line 2, “comprising transaction metadata” should read “comprising the transaction metadata”.
Appropriate correction is required.
In claims 8-9, lines 2 and 3 respectively, “the transaction” should read “the electronic transaction” because the transaction is previously mentioned as an electronic transaction in line 1 of claim 1.
Appropriate correction is required.
In claim 11 lines 1-2, “the second messages” should read “the second message”.
Appropriate correction is required.
In claim 14 lines 1-2, “the first messages” should read “the first message”.
Appropriate correction is required.
In claim 16 line 3, “comprising transaction metadata” should read “comprising the transaction metadata”.
Appropriate correction is required.
In claim 19 line 9, “comprising transaction metadata” should read “comprising the transaction metadata” and in line 15, “marking the transaction” should read “marking the electronic transaction” because the transaction is previously mentioned as an electronic transaction in line 3 of claim 19.
Appropriate correction is required.
In claim 20 line 3, “marking the transaction” should read “marking the electronic transaction” because the transaction is previously mentioned as an electronic transaction in line 3 of claim 19.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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.
3. Claims 1-9 and 19-20 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the transaction metadata” in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 19 recites the limitation “the transaction metadata” in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The remaining claims are rejected for fully incorporating the deficiencies of the base claim(s) from which they depend.
Allowable Subject Matter
4. Claims 10, 12-13, 15 and 17-18 are allowed.
5. Claims 1-9, 11, 14, 16 and 19-20 would be allowable once all objections and 112(b) rejections are resolved.
Conclusion
6. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Wilson Thampi et al. (US 2023/0179587 A1) teaches token processing system and method.
Powell et al. (US 2010/0281490 A1) teaches generating transaction message.
Antao et al. (US 2009/0216666 A1) teaches electronic transaction auditing and accountability.
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMAD SOLAIMAN BHUYAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7843. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 9:00am-5:00pm EST.
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, Robert Beausoliel can be reached on 571-272-3645. 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.
/MOHAMMAD S BHUYAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2167
/ROBERT W BEAUSOLIEL JR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2167