CTNF 19/235,123 CTNF 94401 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. 12-151 AIA 26-51 12-51 Status of Claims This action is in reply to the communications filed on 06/11/2025 and 01/13/2026 . Claims 21-40 have been added. 12-151-10 AIA 12-51-10 Claim s 1-20 have been canceled. Claims 21-40 are currently pending and have been examined. This action is made Non-Final . Examiner Request The Applicant is requested to indicate where in the specification there is support for future claim amendments to avoid U.S.C 112(a) issues that can arise. The Examiner thanks the Applicant in advance. Information Disclosure Statement 06-52 The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/12/2026 was filed before the mailing date of a first Office Action on the merits. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 07-04-01 AIA 07-04 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 21-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea of determining a transaction amount and approving a transaction request without significantly more. Examiner has identified claim 28 as the claim that represents the claimed invention presented in independent claims 21, 28, and 35 . Claim 21 is directed to a method, which is one of the statutory categories of invention; Claim 28 is directed to a device, which is one of the statutory categories of invention; and Claim 35 is directed to a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, which is one of the statutory categories of invention. ( Step 1: YES ). Claim 28 is directed to a computing device , comprising: a processing circuit ; and a memory having executable instructions stored thereon, which when executed by t he processing circuit , cause the processing circuit to: generate, based on location data received from a client device associated with a user account, a list of entities within a geographic boundary of the location data, send the list of entities to the client device , receive, from the client device , a selection of a selected entity from the list of entities, set a flag, wherein the flag indicates that a transaction request from the selected entity selected can be approved, receive, from a merchant system , a transaction request having a provided transaction amount, wherein receiving the transaction request triggers the flag, compare, responsive to the triggering of the flag, the transaction request and provided transaction amount to a first transaction limit, and process the transaction request in response to the provided transaction amount being less than the first transaction limit. These series of steps describe the abstract idea of determining a transaction amount and approving a transaction request (with the exception of the italicized and bolded terms above) , which is mitigating the risk of processing unapproved transactions by flagging approved transaction requests by selected entities; therefore, corresponding to a fundamental economic principle or practice (including mitigating risk). Hence, a fundamental economic principle or practice (mitigating risk) is a Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity. The abstract idea is also the processing of transactions between entities, merchants, and clients, which is a commercial interaction. Therefore, a commercial interaction is also a Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity. The system limitations, e.g., a computing device, processing circuit, memory, client device, and merchant system, do not necessarily restrict the claim from reciting an abstract idea. Thus, claim 28 recites an abstract idea ( Step 2A-Prong 1: YES ). This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional limitations of a computing device, processing circuit, memory, client device, and merchant system, are no more than simply applying the abstract idea using generic computer elements. The additional elements listed above are all recited at a high level of generality and under their broadest reasonable interpretation comprises a generic computing arrangement. The presence of a generic computer arrangement is nothing more than to implement the claimed invention (MPEP 2106.05(f)). Therefore, the recitations of additional elements do not meaningfully apply the abstract idea and hence do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Thus, claim 28 does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application ( Step 2A-Prong 2: NO ). Claim 28 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements of a computing device, processing circuit, memory, client device, and merchant system, are recited at a high level of generality in that it results in no more than simply applying the abstract idea using generic computer elements. The additional elements when considered separately and as an ordered combination do not amount to add significantly more as these limitations provide nothing more than to simply apply the exception in a generic computer environment ( Step 2B: NO ). Thus, claim 28 is not patent eligible. Similar arguments can be extended to the other independent claims, claims 21 and 35 ; and hence, claims 21 and 35 are rejected on similar grounds as claim 28 . Dependent claims 22-27, 29-34, and 36-40 are directed to a method, a device, and a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium , respectively, which perform the steps that describe the abstract idea of determining a transaction amount and approving a transaction request. Furthermore, dependent claims 24-32 and 38 are directed to a device and a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium , respectively, which recites the step: “wherein the location data is received from the client device along with a cryptogram provided by a contactless card after tapping the contactless card to the client device ; wherein the processing circuit is further caused to remove the flag in memory after a predefined amount of time has elapsed; wherein the predefined amount of time is determined by a predictive model ; wherein the processing circuit is further caused to remove the flag in memory after the transaction request has been processed.” The series of steps of claim 22-27, 29-34, and 36-40 describe the abstract idea of determining a transaction amount and approving a transaction request ((with the exception of the italicized and bolded terms above) , which is mitigating the risk of processing unapproved transactions by flagging approved transaction requests by selected entities; therefore, corresponding to a fundamental economic principle or practice (including mitigating risk). Hence, a fundamental economic principle or practice (mitigating risk) is a Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity. The abstract idea is also the processing of transactions between entities, merchants, and clients, which is a commercial interaction. Therefore, a commercial interaction is also a Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity. Thus, claims 22-27, 29-34, and 36-40 recite an abstract idea. The additional elements of a computing device, processing circuit, memory, client device, merchant system, a cryptogram, memory, and predictive model are no more than simply applying the abstract idea using generic computer elements. The presence of a generic computer arrangement is nothing more than to implement the claimed invention (MPEP 2106.05(f)). Therefore, the recitations of additional elements do not meaningfully apply the abstract idea and hence do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Additionally, claim 29 does not integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application by “receiving location data from the client device along with a cryptogram provided by a contactless card after tapping the contactless card to the client device.” These limitations when viewed along with the entirety of the claimed invention, does not meaningfully integrate the judicial exception of determining a transaction amount and approving a transaction request into a specific technological environment for receiving location data from the client device along with a cryptogram provided by a contactless card after tapping the contactless card. Thus, claim 29 does not recite a specific computing device (client device) that is more than generally linked to the technology of contactless cards. Hence, the claims do not recite additional elements that, as a whole, integrates the recited judicial exception into a practical application. Furthermore, the additional elements: a computing device, processing circuit, memory, client device, merchant system, a cryptogram, memory, and predictive model, do not amount to add significantly more as these limitations provide nothing more than to simply apply the exception in a generic computer environment. Dependent claims 22-27, 29-34, and 36-40 have further defined the abstract idea that is present in their respective independent claims: Claims 21, 28 and 35 ; and thus correspond to Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity, and hence are abstract in nature for the reason presented above. The dependent claims 22-27, 29-34, and 36-40 do not include any additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception when considered both individually and as an ordered combination. Therefore, dependent claims 22-27, 29-34, and 36-40 are directed to an abstract idea. Thus, claims 21-40 are not patent-eligible . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co. , 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 21-28 and 30-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mimassi (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2022/0230179 A1; hereinafter “Mimassi”), in view of Mestré (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2013/0185167 A1; hereinafter “Mestré”) . Regarding Claims 21, 28, and 35: Mimassi teaches: A method, comprising: (Mimassi, See , Abstract; Para. 38-40, 54; Fig. 12: All Elements); A computing device, comprising: a processing circuit; and a memory having executable instructions stored thereon, which when executed by the processing circuit, cause the processing circuit to: (Mimassi, the customer enters a business establishment with a customer mobile device which has an application and a connected payment method (bank card, debit card, credit card) stored within the application ( See , Abstract; Para. 38-40, 54; Fig. 12: All Elements)); A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having executable instructions stored thereon, which when executed by a processing circuit, cause the processing circuit to: (Mimassi, the customer enters a business establishment with a customer mobile device which has an application and a connected payment method (bank card, debit card, credit card) stored within the application ( See , Abstract; Para. 38-40, 54; Fig. 12: All Elements)); sending, by a server to a client device associated with a user account, a list of entities generated [ based on encrypted data ] and location data received by the server; (Mimassi, the location of a customer mobile device 102 and its location relative to the payment facilitation device 103...may be established through use of the device's satellite positioning system hardware (e.g., GPS, GLONASS, Gallleo) ( See , Para. 58); When a customer mobile device 102 enters a business establishment, the payment facilitation device 103 and customer mobile device 102 will automatically detect each other and establish a network connection ( See , Para. 59; Figure 6: element 601); the customer enters a business establishment with a customer mobile device which has an application and a connected payment method (bank card, debit card, credit card) stored within the application ( See , Abstract; Para. 38-40, 54; Fig. 12: All Elements)); receiving, by the server from the client device, a selection of a selected entity from the list of entities, wherein receiving the selection causes the server to set a flag indicating that a transaction request from the selected entity can be approved; (Mimassi, a system and method for predictive pre-authorization of transactions ….uses a payment facilitation device at the business location which automatically detects and recognizes registered mobile devices; ( See , Para. 38); the customer enters a business establishment with a customer mobile device which has an application and a connected payment method (bank card, debit card, credit card) stored within the application; ( See , Para. 38-40, 54, 55); zero-step authentication and completion of a transaction. When a customer enters a business establishment 701, the customer's wireless device and business payment facilitation device detect each other and automatically establish connection 702. The business payment facilitation device retrieves the customer device identifier (ID) and uses the customer device ID to retrieve customer information from customer Information database located on a payment - facilitation server 703; ( See , Para. 58, 60, 68; Fig. 7); predictive pre-authorization using biometrics and completion of a transaction. When a customer enters a business establishment 1805, the customer's wireless device and business payment facilitation device detect each other and automatically establish connection 1810…retrieves the customer device identifier (ID) and uses the customer device ID to retrieve customer information from customer information database located on a payment facilitation server 1815 ; ( See , Para. 77, 86; Fig. 8)); receiving, by the server from a merchant system, a subsequent transaction request having a provided transaction amount; (Mimassi, the customer enters a business establishment with a customer mobile device which has an application and a connected payment method (bank card, debit card, credit card) stored within the application. The customer undergoes passive biometric scanning that identifies and authenticates the customer. Upon identification and authentication, the customer is automatically authorized for the amount of an average ticket at a restaurant; ( See , Para. 13, 40); Upon completion of the biometric authentication, the authorization generator predicts a pre-authorized amount based upon customer history (e.g. customer's average ticket amount), customer account preferences (e.g. tipping defaults, incremental authorization limits), and restaurant ticket data (e.g. restaurant's average ticket amount) 1825. The restaurant SIP device receives a pre-authorized amount and the customer is seated 1830 ( See , Para. 62, 65, 77)); comparing, by the server responsive to the flag, the subsequent transaction request and provided transaction amount to a transaction limit; and (Mimassi, If the customer exceeds the pre-authorized amount, then incremental authorization may occur according to customer defined account preferences In the application. For example, a regular customer who normally orders an entree and a glass of wine for dinner will be pre-authorized for an amount that will cover the costs of his typical ticket, but on a certain evening the customer also orders a desert. The system will recognize the anomaly and may automatically Increment his pre-authorization amount by $10 as was defined In his account preferences... When the customer leaves the restaurant, the pre-authorized amount is converted to a charge and the customer's account is charged for the bill; ( See , Para. 40, 42, 59-64, 73; Fig. 4)); processing, by the server, the subsequent transaction request in response to the provided transaction amount being less than the transaction limit. (Mimassi, If the customer exceeds the pre-authorized amount, then incremental authorization may occur according to customer defined account preferences In the application. For example, a regular customer who normally orders an entree and a glass of wine for dinner will be pre-authorized for an amount that will cover the costs of his typical ticket, but on a certain evening the customer also orders a desert. The system will recognize the anomaly and may automatically Increment his pre-authorization amount by $10 as was defined In his account preferences... When the customer leaves the restaurant, the pre-authorized amount is converted to a charge and the customer's account is charged for the bill; ( See , Para. 40); If payment verification 1610 determines a transaction cannot be completed (e.g. insufficient funds, account status, etc.) the authorization generator 1600 may stop execution and send a message to the water's mobile device alerting them that the transaction cannot be conducted . ( See , Para. 59, 62, 64, 73; Fig. 4: Element 405)). Mimassi does not specifically teach sending, by a server to a client device associated with a user account, a list of entities generated [ based on encrypted data ] and location data received by the server. However, Mestré teaches the following limitation: sending, by a server to a client device associated with a user account, a list of entities generated [ based on encrypted data ] and location data received by the server; (Mestré, performing payment transactions using a payment device that can be used with a contactless or contact payment device which has a contact or contactless communication interface; (See, Para. 66); Preferably the payment device receives a response code, and the update information is only applied if the application cryptogram is the one defined by the response code; (See, Para. 22, 25, 38 ); “Payment device” may be a credit card or debit card. It preferably comprises a smartcard; (See, Para. 56); A “smartcard” can be a contact card or a contactless card. A “contact card” has a means for storing Information such as a microchip that can be contacted and read by a card reader through a physical contact of electrodes. A “contactless card” can communicate without the need for direct physical contact... A contactless card is also provided by a portable device such as a mobile phone or personal digital assistant (PDA) In which a smartcard such as a "SIM card” Is embedded). (See, Para. 56-57)). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to have modified Mimassi with the features of Mestré’s system because “ a system and method for performing financial transactions with a payment device such as a payment card and more particularly relates to a system and method for performing financial transactions with a payment device such as an integrated circuit card, e.g. a pre-authorized product, or offline pre-paid product.” “With the advancement of the computer industry, the use of payment devices such as cards, typically magnetic stripe cards or smartcards, has become the preferred method of transacting business. Using such payment cards simplifies the purchase of goods and/or services by avoiding the necessity of using cash for such transactions. Facilitating the use of these payment cards are electronic payment or card accepting terminals, such as credit card reading terminals.” (Mestré, Para. 1 and 2). Regarding Claims 22 and 40: Mimassi teaches: wherein the list of entities comprises a list of merchants. (Mimassi, “Business establishment” or “place of business” as used herein mean the location of any business entity with which customers may transact business. ( See , Para. 52); When a customer mobile device 102 enters a business establishment, the payment facilitation device 103 and customer mobile device 102 will automatically detect each other and establish a network connection ( See , Para. 59; Fig 3: element 302)). Regarding Claim 23: Mimassi teaches: wherein the list of merchants is generated based on location data of the client device associated with the user account (Mimassi, Predictive pre-authorization is coordinated by an authorization generator which stores restaurant ticket data, customer ticket data, and customer account preferences to generate a pre-authorized transaction amount ( See , Para. 13); the location of a customer mobile device 102 and its location relative to the payment facilitation device 103...may be established through use of the device's satellite positioning system hardware (e.g., GPS, GLONASS, Gallleo) ( See , Para. 58); When a customer mobile device 102 enters a business establishment, the payment facilitation device 103 and customer mobile device 102 will automatically detect each other and establish a network connection ( See , Para. 59)). Regarding Claim 24: Mimassi teaches: wherein: the list of merchants is generated by comparing the location data of the client device to merchant geofence data indicating a geographic boundary of a plurality of merchants, anda merchant of the plurality of merchants is added to the list of merchants based on the location data of the client device being within the geographic boundary of the merchant. (Mimassi, the location of a customer mobile device 102 and its location relative to the payment facilitation device 103...may be established through use of the device's satellite positioning system hardware (e.g., GPS, GLONASS, Gallleo) ( See , Para. 58); When a customer mobile device 102 enters a business establishment, the payment facilitation device 103 and customer mobile device 102 will automatically detect each other and establish a network connection ( See , Para. 59; Figure 6: element 601); the customer enters a business establishment with a customer mobile device which has an application and a connected payment method (bank card, debit card, credit card) stored within the application ( See , Abstract; Para. 38-40, 54; Fig. 12: All Elements)). Regarding Claims 25 and 36: Mimassi teaches: wherein the flag has a transaction limit bypass time period (Mimassi, Fully processed and prepared data is sent to the feature selection and classifier 1630 which may identify the features (i.e. variables) that are most pertinent to predicting a transaction amount and then use those features and the data to build, train, and test a classification model that can be used to predict a transaction amount... A few examples of possible Identified features may include...time). ( See , Para.74)). Regarding Claim 26: Mimassi teaches: wherein the transaction limit bypass time period is set based on data indicative of an amount of time taken for a particular user to conduct a transaction once entering a store or after having set a transaction limit bypass request. (Mimassi, If the customer exceeds the pre-authorized amount, then incremental authorization may occur according to customer defined account preferences…a regular customer who normally orders an entree and a glass of wine for dinner will be pre-authorized for an amount that will cover the costs of his typical ticket, but on a certain evening the customer also orders a desert. The system will recognize the anomaly and may automatically Increment his pre-authorization amount by $10 as was defined In his account preferences... When the customer leaves the restaurant, the pre-authorized amount is converted to a charge and the customer's account is charged for the bill; ( See , Para. 40, 42, 59-64); Fully processed and prepared data is sent to the feature selection and classifier 1630 which may identify the features (i.e. variables) that are most pertinent to predicting a transaction amount and then use those features and the data to build, train, and test a classification model that can be used to predict a transaction amount... A few examples of possible Identified features may include...time ( See , Para. 73-74)). Regarding Claims 27: Mimassi teaches: further comprising removing the flag after the transaction limit bypass time period has elapsed. (Mimassi, The authorization generator uses the stored data to closely predict the total transaction amount so that only the amount that is required to complete the transaction ls pre-authorized ( See , Para. 39); If payment verification 1610 determines a transaction cannot be completed (e.g. insufficient funds, account status, etc.) the authorization generator 1600 may stop execution and send a message to the waiter's mobile device alerting them that the transaction cannot be conducted; otherwise the authorization generator 1600 proceeds uninterrupted with its process ( See , Para.72, 73; Fig. 15-16)). Regarding Claims 30 and 37: Mimassi teaches: wherein the processing circuit is further caused to remove the flag in memory after a predefined amount of time has elapsed. (Mimassi, The authorization generator uses the stored data to closely predict the total transaction amount so that only the amount that is required to complete the transaction ls pre-authorized ( See , Para. 39); If payment verification 1610 determines a transaction cannot be completed (e.g. insufficient funds, account status, etc.) the authorization generator 1600 may stop execution and send a message to the waiter's mobile device alerting them that the transaction cannot be conducted; otherwise the authorization generator 1600 proceeds uninterrupted with its process ( See , Para.72, 73; Fig. 15-16)). Regarding Claims 31 and 38: Mimassi teaches: wherein the predefined amount of time is determined by a predictive model. (Mimassi, Predictive pre-authorization is coordinated by an authorization generator which stores restaurant ticket data, customer ticket data, and customer account preferences to generate a pre-authorized transaction amount; ( See , Para. 13); retrieve a subset of the customer history data that corresponds to the identified customer; compute a customer average transaction amount using the subset of the customer history data; and determine, using a machine-learned predictive algorithm, a pre-authorization amount using the customer average transaction amount and the subset of the customer history data as Inputs into the machine-earned predictive algorithm ( See , Para. 14, 74)). Regarding Claim 32: Mimassi teaches: wherein the processing circuit is further caused to remove the flag in memory after the transaction request has been processed. (Mimassi, If payment verification 1610 determines a transaction cannot be completed (e.g. insufficient funds, account status, etc.) the authorization generator 1600 may stop execution and send a message to the waiter's mobile device alerting them that the transaction cannot be conducted; otherwise the authorization generator 1600 proceeds uninterrupted with its process ( See , Para. 39, 72, 73; Fig. 15-16)). Regarding Claim 33: Mimassi teaches: wherein the processing circuit is further caused to: determine a second transaction limit, and (Mimassi, The customer may have multiple payment cards connected with the application. One card is selected as the default card. If the customer decides to switch cards mid-meal, then the predictive pre-authorization process is repeated using the new switched card... For example, if a customer has a corporate card and a personal card connected to the system, and the customer exceeds corporate limits (second transaction limit); ( See , Para. 42)); in response to the transaction amount exceeding the second transaction limit when the flag is set. (Mimassi, If payment verification 1610 determines a transaction cannot be completed (e.g. insufficient funds, account status, etc.) the authorization generator 1600 may stop execution and send a message to the water's mobile device alerting them that the transaction cannot be conducted . ( See , Para. 73)). Regarding Claims 34 and 39: Mimassi teaches: wherein the location data is derived from one of Global Positioning System (GPS) coordinates of the client device or connection data of the client device. (Mimassi, the location of a customer mobile device 102 and its location relative to the payment facilitation device 103 or other customer mobile devices 102 may be established through use of the device's satellite positioning system hardware (e.g., GPS). ( See , Para. 58)) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 29 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mimassi (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2022/0230179 A1; hereinafter “Mimassi”), in view of Mestré (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2013/0185167 A1; hereinafter “Mestré”), and further in view of Wolfond (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2014/0207682 A1; hereinafter “Wolfond”) . Regarding Claim 29: Mimassi and Mestré do not specifically teach the location data is received from the client device along with a cryptogram provided by a contactless card after tapping the contactless card to the client device. However, Wolfond teaches the following limitation: wherein the location data is received from the client device along with a cryptogram provided by a contactless card after tapping the contactless card to the client device. (Wolfond, the systems and methods allow customers to make payments (e.g., for purchases) by simply tapping their mobile device (e.g., smartphone) against a merchant's mobile device (e.g., smartphone) or by tapping their credit card against a merchant's mobile device. ( See , Para. 19-20); customer device 140 may also transmit additional data to help authenticate the user (e.g., a cryptogram or OTP generated on the device, an embedded card, or a card tapped on the reader)….. t ransaction server 120 (or optionally issuer 190 ) can verify the cryptogram and/or tapped or embedded card data to identify the merchant or customer device. ( See , Para. 59); transaction server 120 may use the location information provided by customer device 140 to compare with location information obtained from merchant device 110 in relation to the same transaction (i.e., identified by the same transaction identifier) ( See , Para. 88, 134)). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to have modified Mimassi and Mestré with the features of Wolfond’s system because “ contactless or proximity payment methods are increasingly seen as a way for credit card issuers to penetrate the cash payment market.” “The systems and methods allow customers to make payments (e.g., for purchases) by simply tapping their mobile device (e.g., smartphone) against a merchant's mobile device (e.g., smartphone) or by tapping their credit card against a merchant's mobile device. In some cases, the customer may also use a mobile device to scan a Quick Response (QR) code generated on the merchant's mobile device to complete a transaction. The QR code may comprise or refer to transaction information. In some cases, the customer device or merchant device may first be tapped against one or more NFC tags representing items or stock keeping units (SKU), to include the respective items in the transaction to be completed. This intuitive and simple approach enables faster transactions for merchants, while allowing merchants, acquirers, and payment networks to seamlessly integrate the described systems and methods into their applications and services, such as billing and inventory.” (Wolfond, Para. 3 and 20) . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure are the following: Bierbaum (U.S. Patent No. US 9,552,584 B1) “Electronic Wallet Ready to Pay Timer” Bailey (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2014/0207683 A1) “Combination payment card and methods thereof” Beenau (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2017/0228738 A1) “Authorizing radio frequency transactions using a vascular scan” Shakkarwa (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2020/0387895 A1) “Apparatus and methods for payment transactions using near field communication” Rule (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2021/0004803 A1) “Constraining transactional capabilities for contactless cards” McGovern (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2021/0012321 A1) “Enhanced payment processing” Saunders (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2021/0142323 A1) “Funding a radio frequency device transaction” Butvin (U.S. Patent No. US 11,379,821 B2) “Replacing a customer card payment with a one-time loan at a point of sale” Rule (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2021/0166517 A1) “Contextual tapping engine” Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMED H MUSTAFA whose telephone number is (571)270-7978. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 - 5:00. 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 on 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. /MOHAMMED H MUSTAFA/Examiner, Art Unit 3693/Mike Anderson/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3693 Application/Control Number: 19/235,123 Page 2 Art Unit: 3693 Application/Control Number: 19/235,123 Page 3 Art Unit: 3693 Application/Control Number: 19/235,123 Page 4 Art Unit: 3693 Application/Control Number: 19/235,123 Page 5 Art Unit: 3693 Application/Control Number: 19/235,123 Page 6 Art Unit: 3693 Application/Control Number: 19/235,123 Page 7 Art Unit: 3693 Application/Control Number: 19/235,123 Page 9 Art Unit: 3693 Application/Control Number: 19/235,123 Page 10 Art Unit: 3693 Application/Control Number: 19/235,123 Page 11 Art Unit: 3693 Application/Control Number: 19/235,123 Page 12 Art Unit: 3693 Application/Control Number: 19/235,123 Page 13 Art Unit: 3693 Application/Control Number: 19/235,123 Page 14 Art Unit: 3693 Application/Control Number: 19/235,123 Page 15 Art Unit: 3693 Application/Control Number: 19/235,123 Page 16 Art Unit: 3693 Application/Control Number: 19/235,123 Page 17 Art Unit: 3693 Application/Control Number: 19/235,123 Page 18 Art Unit: 3693 Application/Control Number: 19/235,123 Page 19 Art Unit: 3693 Application/Control Number: 19/235,123 Page 20 Art Unit: 3693 Application/Control Number: 19/235,123 Page 21 Art Unit: 3693
Prosecution Insights