DETAILED ACTION
This Non-Final Office Action is in response to the application filed on 04/18/2025.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Claim Objections
Claims 2, 8, 10 and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 2 and 10 recite “BLE advertisement message format” while the definition of the abbreviation “BLE” is not specified in the claims.
Claims 8 and 15 recite “a result of TWR” while the definition of the abbreviation “TWR” is not specified in the claims.
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.
Claims 3 and 11 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 3 and 11 recite “wherein the UWB payment identification information (UWB payment identifier) includes any one of … reserved future use (RFU).” It is uncleared what scope of payment identifier information the phrase “reserved future use (RFU)” limits.
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 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
As an initial matter, the claims as a whole are to a process and an apparatus, which falls within one or more statutory categories. (Step 1: YES) The recitation of the claimed invention is then further analyzed as follow, in which the abstract elements are boldfaced.
Claim 1 recites:
A method for operating a first ultra-wide band (UWB) device, the method comprising:
receiving, from a second UWB device, an advertisement message including UWB payment identification information (UWB payment identifier) indicating a payment method supported by a payment service between the first UWB device and the second UWB device and location information (retail identifier) about a location where the payment service is performed;
performing UWB ranging based on the UWB payment identification information (UWB payment identifier) and the location information (retail identifier) about the location where the payment service is performed; and
performing a payment transaction based on a result of the UWB ranging.
Claims 2 and 10 recite:
wherein the advertisement message is configured according to a BLE advertisement message format, or the advertisement message is configured according to a UWB advertisement message format.
Claims 3 and 11 recite:
wherein the UWB payment identification information (UWB payment identifier) includes any one of information indicating downlink time difference of arrival (DL-TDoA) support, information indicating contention-based ranging support, information indicating in-band UWB payment transaction support, and reserved future use (RFU).
Claims 4 and 12 recite:
wherein the location information (retail identifier) about the location where the payment service is performed includes at least one of name information about a retail store where the payment service is performed and type information about the retail store.
Claims 5 and 13 recite:
wherein the advertisement message further includes UWB configuration information (UWB configuration), and wherein the UWB configuration information includes at least one of a UWB session ID, a service ID, a UWB configuration ID, a channel number, and a device role.
Claims 6 and 14 recite:
wherein a payment profile manager in a framework of the first UWB device controls the first UWB device to simultaneously or sequentially use a plurality of UWB ranging methods.
Claim 7 recites:
wherein the payment profile manager sets a state transition diagram for processing the plurality of UWB ranging methods.
Claims 8 and 15 recite:
setting a payment-available zone based on at least one of an angle of arrival (AoA) azimuth, a range of an AoA elevation value, and a distance value according to a result of TWR.
Claim 9 recites:
A first ultra-wideband (UWB) device, comprising:
a transceiver; and
a controller, wherein the controller is configured to:
receive, from a second UWB device, an advertisement message including UWB payment identification information (UWB payment identifier) indicating a payment method supported by a payment service between the first UWB device and the second UWB device and location information (retail identifier) about a location where the payment service is performed;
perform UWB ranging based on the UWB payment identification information (UWB payment identifier) and the location information (retail identifier) about the location where the payment service is performed; and
perform a payment transaction based on a result of the UWB ranging.
Based on the limitations above, the claims describe a process that covers conducting transaction based on distance. Conducting transaction is considered to be a commercial interaction, which falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas. As such, the claim(s) recite(s) a Judicial Exception. (Step 2A prong one: Yes)
This analysis then evaluates whether the claims as a whole integrates the recited Judicial Exception into a practical application of the exception. In particular, the claims recite the additional element(s) of “device” or “controller” as a mere tool to perform the steps of the Judicial Exception, which encompasses no more than Mere Instruction to Apply.
For example, the limitation “receiving, from a second UWB device, an advertisement message including UWB payment identification information (UWB payment identifier) indicating a payment method supported by a payment service between the first UWB device and the second UWB device and location information (retail identifier) about a location where the payment service is performed” encompasses no more than generically invoking a device to apply the Judicial Exception step of receiving an advertising message including payment identification information indicating a payment method supported by a payment service between two parties and location information of where the payment service is performed;
the limitation “performing UWB ranging based on the UWB payment identification information (UWB payment identifier) and the location information (retail identifier) about the location where the payment service is performed” encompasses no more than generically invoking a device to apply the Judicial Exception step of determining the distance (ranging) based the payment identifier and the retail identifier about the location where the payment service performed;
the limitation “performing a payment transaction based on a result of the UWB ranging” encompasses no more than generically invoking a device to apply the Judicial Exception step of performing a payment transaction based on the distance determined;
the limitation “wherein the advertisement message is configured according to a BLE advertisement message format, or the advertisement message is configured according to a UWB advertisement message format” encompasses no more than generically invoking a device to apply the Judicial Exception step of configuring advertisement in particular format;
the limitation “wherein the UWB payment identification information (UWB payment identifier) includes any one of information indicating downlink time difference of arrival (DL-TDoA) support, information indicating contention-based ranging support, information indicating in-band UWB payment transaction support, and reserved future use (RFU)” encompasses no more than generically invoking a device to apply the Judicial Exception step of including indicative information in payment identification information;
the limitation “wherein the location information (retail identifier) about the location where the payment service is performed includes at least one of name information about a retail store where the payment service is performed and type information about the retail store” encompasses no more than generically invoking a device to apply the Judicial Exception step of including name and/or type information about the retail store in the location information;
the limitation “wherein the advertisement message further includes UWB configuration information (UWB configuration), and wherein the UWB configuration information includes at least one of a UWB session ID, a service ID, a UWB configuration ID, a channel number, and a device role” encompasses no more than generically invoking a device to apply the Judicial Exception step of including UWB configuration information in the advertisement message;
the limitation “wherein a payment profile manager in a framework of the first UWB device controls the first UWB device to simultaneously or sequentially use a plurality of UWB ranging methods” encompasses no more than generically invoking a device to apply the Judicial Exception step of using a plurality of ranging methods simultaneously or sequentially;
the limitation “wherein the payment profile manager sets a state transition diagram for processing the plurality of UWB ranging methods” encompasses no more than generically invoking a device to apply the Judicial Exception step of setting a state transaction diagram for processing the plurality of ranging methods;
the limitation “setting a payment-available zone based on at least one of an angle of arrival (AoA) azimuth, a range of an AoA elevation value, and a distance value according to a result of TWR” encompasses no more than generically invoking a device to apply the Judicial Exception step of setting a payment-available zone based on the result of ranging.
Other than being generally linked to the steps of the Judicial Exception, the additional elements in the above step(s) is/are recited at a high-level of generality, without technological detail of how the particular steps are performed technologically.
The additional element(s) of “transceiver”, “BLE message format”, “UWB message format” are generically recited to perform communication steps such as receiving and transmitting.
The examiner further noted generic computer affixes such as “UWB” are appended to abstract elements such as “payment identification information”, “ranging methods” , but found that to be mere instructions to implement the Judicial Exception idea on a computer.
Indeed, the instant claims (1) attempted to cover a solution to an identified problem with no restriction on how the result is accomplished and no description of the mechanism for accomplishing the result; (2) used of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks or simply added a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to the Judicial Exception and (3) generally applied the Judicial Exception to a generic computing environment without limitation indicative of practical application (See MPEP 2106.04(d)I). Thus, the claims are no more than Mere Instruction to Apply the Judicial Exception (See MPEP 2106.05(f)) or adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception (See MPEP 2106.05(g)), which do not integrate the cited Judicial Exception into practical application (Step 2A prong two: No) The claims are directed to a Judicial Exception.
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 two devices to conduct transaction based on distance amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. Dependent claim *** merely limit the abstract idea but do not recite any additional element beyond the cited abstract idea, thus, do not amount to significantly more. No additional element currently recited in the claims amount the claims to be significantly more than the cited abstract idea. (Step 2B: No)
Therefore, claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Examiner Note
Based on prior art searches, the prior art deemed the closest to the instant claims is Hammerschmidt et al. (US 20220137177) Hammerschmidt discloses an UWB device receiving BLE advertisement message including identifier and the location of another broadcasting UWB device and performing ranging between the two device. Hammerschmidt failed to disclose that the advertisement message includes information “indicating a payment method supported by a payment service between the first UWB device and the second UWB device and location information (retail identifier) about a location where the payment service is performed”, “performing UWB ranging based on the UWB payment identification information (UWB payment identifier) and the location information (retail identifier) about the location where the payment service is performed” and “performing a payment transaction based on a result of the UWB ranging”. While prior art, such as Burdsall et al (US 11182772), was found to disclose distance based payment transaction between two devices, no combination of prior art was found to render the instant claim obvious without applying improper hindsight. As such, claims 1-15 are considered novel and non-obvious.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hammerschmidt et al. (US 20220137177)
Burdsall et al. (US 11182772)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHO KWONG whose telephone number is (571)270-7955. The examiner can normally be reached 9am - 5pm EST M-F.
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, MICHAEL W ANDERSON can be reached at 571-270-0508. 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.
/CHO YIU KWONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3693
Prosecution Insights