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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20, as originally filed 06/03/2025, are pending and have been examined on the merits (Claims 1, 9, and 15 being independent). The instant application is a CON of application number, 16/963,675 (Patent No. US 12,354,091 B2) which was issued.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/03/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper time wise extension of the "right to exclude" granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the claims at issue are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I. B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.lll(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claim Rejections - Double Patenting (Obviousness-type)
Claims 1-20 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 3, 5-6, 8-9, 13, 15, 17, 25, 27, and 29 of U.S. Patent No. 12,354,091 B2. With respect to independent claim 1 of the instant application, independent claim 1 of the instant application, and independent claim 1 of the '091 patent both recite substantially similar limitations for the method and system which (1) receiving, with at least one processor, transaction data associated with a plurality of payment transactions; (2) receiving, with at least one processor, first aggregation of interest data associated with a type of aggregation of interest; (3) determining, with at least one processor, a first key associated with each transaction of the plurality of payment transactions based on a first portion of the transaction data associated with each transaction of the plurality of payment transactions and the first aggregation of interest data; (4) storing, with at least one processor, a second portion of the transaction data associated with each transaction of the plurality of payment transactions in a map data structure based on the first key of the respective transaction of the plurality of payment transactions, wherein the first portion of the transaction data and the second portion of the transaction data are different; (5) sorting, with at least one processor, the first keys associated with the plurality of payment transactions based on the first aggregation of interest data; (6) identifying, with at least one processor, a first plurality of the first keys associated with a first subset of the plurality of payment transactions based on the first aggregation of interest data and a first user request; (7) communicating, with at least one processor, a first value based on at least one of the first plurality of the first keys and the second portion of the transaction data associated with each key of the first plurality of the first keys associated with the first subset of the plurality of payment transactions based on the first user request. The ‘091 patent is narrower in that claim 1 of ‘091 patent have limitations directed towards (1) receiving, with a plurality of stream processors, transaction data associated with a plurality of payment transactions, each stream processor of the plurality of stream processors comprising at least one first processor, wherein each stream processor of the plurality of stream processors receives a respective portion of the transaction data associated with the plurality of payment transactions, wherein each stream processor of the plurality of stream processors comprises a respective computing device of a plurality of separate computing devices each acting as a data ingestion service; (2) receiving, with the plurality of stream processors, first aggregation of interest data associated with a type of aggregation of interest; (3) determining, with the plurality of stream processors, a first key associated with each transaction of the plurality of payment transactions based on a first portion of the remaining portion of the transaction data associated with each transaction of the plurality of payment transactions and the first aggregation of interest data; (4) storing, with the plurality of stream processors, a second portion of the remaining portion of the transaction data associated with each transaction of the plurality of payment transactions in the plurality of time-based map data structures on the plurality of servers based on the first key of a respective transaction of the plurality of payment transactions, wherein the first portion of the remaining portion of the transaction data and the second portion of the remaining portion of the transaction data are different, (5) sorting, with the plurality of stream processors, the first keys associated with the plurality of payment transactions stored in the cache based on the first aggregation of interest data; (6) reactively determining, with the at least one aggregator, a first value based on a first plurality of the first keys associated with a first subset of the plurality of payment transactions based on the first user request (7) communicating, with the at least one aggregator, the first value based on the first user request to the scoring engine; (8) filtering, with the plurality of stream processors, a portion of the transaction data based on the first aggregation of interest data, wherein the portion of the transaction data is discarded to provide a remaining portion of the transaction data; determining, with the plurality of stream processors, a time duration of interest based on the first aggregation of interest data associated with the type of aggregation of interest; (9) proactively calculating, with at least one aggregator of a plurality of aggregators, a first set of aggregation values based on the remaining portion of the transaction data associated with the second subset of the plurality of payment transactions associated with each of a plurality of first predetermined time periods, the plurality of aggregators comprising an aggregator for each server of the plurality of servers for the cache, and the at least one aggregator of the plurality of aggregators comprising at least one second processor different from the at least one first processor; (10) proactively calculating, with the at least one aggregator of the plurality of aggregators, a second set of aggregation values based on the remaining portion of the transaction data associated with a third subset of the plurality of payment transactions associated with each of a plurality of second predetermined time periods; receiving, with the at least one aggregator, a first user request from a scoring engine; (11) calculating, with the at least one aggregator, a second value based on the first plurality of the first keys associated with the first subset of the plurality of payment transactions, wherein the first subset of the plurality of payment transactions is associated with a portion of the first time period of interest outside of the plurality of first predetermined time periods and the plurality of second predetermined time periods; (12) calculating, with the at least one aggregator, the first value based on a subset of the first set of aggregation values within the first time period of interest, a subset of the second set of aggregation values within the first time period of interest, and the second value, wherein each of the plurality of first predetermined time periods has a first duration and each of the plurality of second predetermined time periods has a second duration, wherein the second duration is greater than the first duration, and wherein the first duration is an hour and the second duration is a day; (13) generating, with the scoring engine, a risk score based on the first value received from the at least one aggregator; (14) determining, with the scoring engine, that an incoming transaction is a fraudulent transaction based on the risk score; and wherein the incoming transaction is denied based on determining the transaction is a fraudulent transaction denying, with at least one of a transaction service provider system, an issuer system, a merchant system, or an acquirer system, the incoming transaction based on determining the transaction is a fraudulent transaction. That is, the claim under examination is anticipated by the reference claims of the ‘091 patent (i.e., the entire scope of the reference claim falls within the scope of the claim under examination). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the subject matter claimed in the instant application is fully disclosed in the ‘091 patent and is covered by the ‘091 patent since the ‘091 patent and the instant application are claiming common subject matter.
With respect to independent claims 1, 9, and 15 of the instant application, claims 1, 9, and 15 recite substantially similar limitations to claims 1, 13, and 25 of the ‘091 patent, and therefore is rejected under the same rational.
Prior Art Rejection
As shown in the art and the parent patent, while some individual features of claims 1-20 may be shown in the prior art of record, one of ordinary skill in the art would not be motivated to modify the teachings of the prior art to provide the method and/or system which perform the operations claimed in the independent claims.
The closest art of record, US Patent Number 8,626,705 B2 to Barrett et al. (hereinafter Barrett ‘705), generally discloses “methods for determining aggregated transaction level data for specific group characteristics are provided. Aggregated transaction level data can be used for target marketing campaigns by looking at past and potential spending habits of populations with group characteristics specified in the transaction data aggregates”.
The closest art of record, US Publication Number 2013/0124263 A1 to Amaro et al. (hereinafter Amaro), generally discloses “summarizing transaction data via aggregating transactions according to geographical regions (e.g., based on postal codes) for a plurality of merchant categories, normalize the aggregated spending across the merchant categories for each geographical region, rank the regions for each category based on the normalized spending, generate percentile indicators based on the ranking result, and generate spending indices that are proportional to the normalized spending within each category”.
The closest art of record, US Patent Number 8,086,528 B2 to Barrett et al. (hereinafter Barrett ‘528), generally discloses “methods for determining and reporting aggregated transaction level data regarding a particular user are disclosed. Based on the requests of one or more information requesters, an aggregator server can request transaction level data for all accounts associated with a particular user from a transaction database.”.
With respect to claim 1-20 over 35 USC 103, as a whole, teachings of applied prior arts, (Barrett’705, Amaro, and Barrett’528) are difference from the claimed invention or novelty, thereby taken alone or in combination, fail to teach or suggest: “storing, with at least one processor, a second portion of the transaction data associated with each transaction of the plurality of payment transactions in a map data structure based on the first key of the respective transaction of the plurality of payment transactions, wherein the first portion of the transaction data and the second portion of the transaction data are different; identifying, with at least one processor, a first plurality of the first keys associated with a first subset of the plurality of payment transactions based on the first aggregation of interest data and a first user request; and communicating, with at least one processor, a first value based on at least one of the first plurality of the first keys and the second portion of the transaction data associated with each key of the first plurality of the first keys associated with the first subset of the plurality of payment transactions based on the first user request.” as recited claims to independent claims 1, 9, and 15.
Patent Eligibility- 35 U.S.C. § 101
The 101 rejection is not applicable because even though the claims recite an abstract idea, the limitations when considered in ordered combination are indicative of integration into a practical application because the claims are directed to a particular method and system {that} involve identifying the first keys associated with a first subset of the payment transactions and communicating a first value based on the first keys and the second portion of the transaction data associated with each key of the first keys associated with the first subset of the payment transactions for determining the transaction is the fraudulent transaction, when viewed as a whole, they represent improvements that are technical in nature as improving upon conventional computing environments and/or another technical field. The limitations begin to seem more “meaningful” from a technical perspective, than merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. For the reasons stated above, claims 1-20 have been deemed to be patent eligible under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record but not relied upon herein but pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure is listed in the enclosed PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YONG S PARK whose telephone number is (571)272-8349. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:00-5:00 PM, 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, Bennett M. Sigmond can be reached on (303)297-4411. 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.
/YONGSIK PARK/Examiner, Art Unit 3694
July 16, 2026
/BENNETT M SIGMOND/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3694
Prosecution Insights