Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
DETAILED ACTION
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.
Claim 1 is 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 “a third-party source” and “a third-party submitter”. Is the term “third-party” intended to represent different entities in different claimed steps? Use of this term “a third-party” multiple times in the claims, renders claimed invention indefinite. Examiner notes for the record that interpretation for term, is afforded very little context in the supporting disclosure (please see single reference paragraph 31), that permits a deductive interpretation; further noting that the disclosure as a whole teaching is directed to data format/representation rather than data access to “third-parties” (See at least Abstract of Applicant’s published disclosure 2018/0089752). Consequently, for purposes of examination, examiner offers alternative interpretations of “a third-party” from the same prior art reference.
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 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to abstract idea without significantly more.
Independent claim 1 being a system reciting the limitations of:
(A) obtaining transaction data, from a third-party source that maintains records for a financial account of a user, electronic purchase data, the electronic purchase data identifying a transaction of the user from which payment was made using the financial account of the user (e.g. gathering information);
(B) generating an electronic receipt for the transaction, the electronic receipt including a set of information that is based on, but not the same as, the electronic purchase data; wherein generating the electronic receipt includes: ENFY.P101C1Page 23 of 25(i) providing a verification identifier that is unique to the electronic receipt on the electronic receipt, the verification identifier being generated after the electronic purchase data is obtained, and (ii) linking the electronic receipt to the stored electronic purchase data (e.g. adding a cross-reference index);
(C) provide an interface to enable a third-party submitter to submit a verification code that corresponds to the verification identifier (provisioning input of index); and
(D) verifying that the electronic receipt corresponds to the transaction identified by the electronic purchase data from which the electronic receipt that provides the verification code was generated (e.g. matching).
The limitations of obtaining, adding an index data, provision input of index, and matching data to index as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance by human activity but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting “one or more processors”, and a “memory” for storing the instructions for performance thereof, nothing in the claim elements preclude the steps from practically being performed by human activity. For example, but for the language “processors”, obtaining information, cross-referencing that information, and allowing the input for matching accordingly, in the context of this claims encompass the user manually performing information cross-referencing. Similarly, the limitations directed to data storage, indexing and retrieval, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers human performance under the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance (“2019 PEG”), but for the recitation of generic computer components. For example, but for the “processors”, associating obtained data with an index is an activity that can and is commonly performed by a human. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation by human activity but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claims recites an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim only recites one additional element - using a processor/computer device with input and processing capability for relating data, as generally understood to be embraced within computer technology, to communicate, store, process and display information in a predetermined or ‘programmed’ manner. The “one or more processors”, is recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function, 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 claims are directed to an abstract idea. The claims do 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 a processor to perform the recited 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 independent claims are not patent eligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 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 –
(e) the invention was described in a patent granted on an application for patent by another filed in the United States before the invention thereof by the applicant for patent, or on an international application by another who has fulfilled the requirements of paragraphs (1), (2), and (4) of section 371(c) of this title before the invention thereof by the applicant for patent.
The changes made to 35 U.S.C. 102(e) by the American Inventors Protection Act of 1999 (AIPA) and the Intellectual Property and High Technology Technical Amendments Act of 2002 do not apply when the reference is a U.S. patent resulting directly or indirectly from an international application filed before November 29, 2000. Therefore, the prior art date of the reference is determined under 35 U.S.C. 102(e) prior to the amendment by the AIPA (pre-AIPA 35 U.S.C. 102(e)).
Claims 1 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(e) as being anticipated by Lay et al. (US 2009/0271265), herein “Lay”.
Referring to Claims1, Lay teaches a computer system (Title: ELECTRONIC RECEIPT SYSTEM AND METHOD; and Fig. 1), the system comprising:
a memory, the memory storing a set of instructions;
one or more processors that execute the set of instructions to:
(A) obtain, from a third-party source that maintains records for a financial account of a user, electronic purchase data (e.g. Fig. 3; 0047: Upon enrollment, enrollee's can link as many credit or debit cards to their account as desired. A business owner, for example, can link both personal debit/credit card(s) and business debit/credit card(s) to the same account, thus making the tracking of both personal and business card based transactions (and related receipts) much easier), the electronic purchase data identifying a transaction of the user from which payment was made using the financial account of the user (e.g. Fig. 6; and ¶0058: If a credit card is swiped at the POS location, or waived in front of a RFID receiver, as in the case of contactless enabled credit cards, the card number can be truncated and encrypted and the result can be transmitted from the POS to the remoter server/database location in order to identify the consumer and link the electronic receipt transaction to their account. At the remote server/database location, the encrypted/truncated card number can be decrypted. The truncated card number can be then compared with the truncated results previously stored in order to match the user to his/her account.);
(B) generate an electronic receipt for the transaction, the electronic receipt including a set of information that is based on, but not the same as, the electronic purchase data (e.g. Fig. 7); wherein generating the electronic receipt includes:
(i) providing a verification identifier that is unique to the electronic receipt on the electronic receipt, the verification identifier being generated after the electronic purchase data is obtained ¶0064: Upon receiving the information, the remote server/database can generate a single header line which can contain a select subset of this information 606. This can preferably include the Merchant ID, the Date, the Time, the Grand Total and the Payment Method. This header can then be displayed in a listing which is visible to the individual consumer/purchaser over the Internet whenever he/she logs into the account via the Internet from any remote computer terminal/keyboard location 607), and/or ¶0105: In another embodiment, the system allows retailers to create new user accounts from the POP by automatically linking their printed receipts for non-enrolled customers to the electronic receipt system. This can be accomplished, for example, by allowing the retailer to automatically generate and pull a unique code and a ghost user account number from our system every time a receipt is printed. The server's unique code can be linked to the details of the printed receipt that is stored in the retailers system, and the ghost user account number is linked to the unique code that represents a consumer who has not yet enrolled into the system. Once the unique code and account number have been created in our system, the unique code can be sent back to the retailer and printed on the paper receipt before it is given to the customer. The printed paper receipt can also print a disclaimer stating that the customer can go to a website, register to receive future receipts from the retailer in electronic format, key-in the unique code, and then receive the details of the paper receipt that had previously printed the unique code. If a customer decides to enroll into the electronic receipt program, they will be able to view their first electronic receipt upon login
(ii) linking the electronic receipt to the stored electronic purchase data (¶0088: When an electronic receipt is generated, the retailers unique MID and unique receipt number are automatically tied to the users unique account number. Once linked, the retailer can easily make the connection between the user's identifiers and the product they are trying to return and the appropriate retailer/store/location and unique transaction/receipt number; and/or ¶0105: ….The server's unique code can be linked to the details of the printed receipt that is stored in the retailers system, and the ghost user account number is linked to the unique code that represents a consumer who has not yet enrolled into the system. Once the unique code and account number have been created in our system, the unique code can be sent back to the retailer and printed on the paper receipt before it is given to the customer),
(C) provide an interface to enable a third-party submitter to submit a verification code that corresponds to the verification identifier (e.g. Figs. 7 and 8; and ¶0105: …The printed paper receipt can also print a disclaimer stating that the customer can go to a website, register to receive future receipts from the retailer in electronic format, key-in the unique code, and then receive the details of the paper receipt that had previously printed the unique code. If a customer decides to enroll into the electronic receipt program, they will be able to view their first electronic receipt upon login; and
(D) verify that the electronic receipt corresponds to the transaction identified by the electronic purchase data from which the electronic receipt that provides the verification code was generated (e.g. ¶0090: If a user chooses to print their receipt for the product return (i.e., using a paper-based return method), various security measures can be used to help retailers reduce fraudulent returns. For example, the system can be set up so that the user only has the opportunity to print a "returnable" receipt once. In other words, only the first receipt that a users prints from within the user interface will have the necessary data for a retailer to process a return. After that, the user will have to use the paperless return option described above. When a user prints their receipt for the first time, it will include a unique bar code that the cashier may scan to determine the legitimacy of the receipt; and/or ¶0095: The server then determines whether the transmitted identification information corresponds to a registered user 708. If not, the server transmits an appropriate response to the registered merchant to indicate that the identification information does not correspond to a registered user in the system. If the identification information is found to correspond to a registered user, the server transmits the appropriate electronic receipts (or information representative of the electronic receipts) to the registered merchant 709).
Conclusion
Relevant art not relied on but made of record include
Schultz 20020188561 discloses a central receipt repository that may be used by transaction parties and third parties. (Schultz, para 0043, “Receipt handler 78 is similar to receipt handler 62 of FIG. 4 but can be used remotely via network 22 by more persons than buyer 20; anyone who completed a sales transaction with seller 18 can remotely access receipts pertaining to the transaction. Furthermore, others who did not participate in any transactions, such as market research firms and manufacturers of products offered by seller 18, may be permitted access to aggregate information generated by receipt handler 78 using data gleaned from the stored receipts, such as statistics and raw numbers without any information identifying the buyers. Because buyer privacy may be important, such other parties may not be permitted access to the receipts themselves.”)
Yellin 8296229 discloses a central receipt repository. (Yellin, col.7lns.35-57, “In a further embodiment of the present invention, membership in the receipt management network facilitates more efficient merchandise returns by consumers and protects both merchants and consumers from fraud. Member consumers do not have to worry about losing receipts, and possibly not being able to return merchandise, since the receipts are stored electronically within the receipt management network and accessible to the merchants. Consumers can opt to simply print receipts from their personal computer, or they can rely on member merchants to electronically retrieve their receipt data in-store (for merchants that opt to do so). This receipt storage allows merchants to check the identity of the consumer with the receipt prior to returning value to the consumer.”)
This is a continuation of applicant's earlier Application No.15/719,410. All claims are drawn to the same invention claimed in the earlier application and could have been finally rejected on the grounds and art of record in the next Office action if they had been entered in the earlier application. The current claim is identical to the claim dated 9/28/17 filed in the earlier application. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL even though it is a first action in this case. See MPEP § 706.07(b). 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 extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no, however, event 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 ALLEN C CHEIN whose telephone number is (571)270-7985. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am -5pm.
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, Florian Zeender can be reached at (571) 272-6790. 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.
/ALLEN C CHEIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627
Prosecution Insights