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 .
1. Acknowledgement is made to the amendment, filed 4/13/2026. Claims 1-20 are pending.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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 –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
2. Claims 10-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wong et al. (US 2021/0035109 A1), hereinafter Wong.
Regarding claim 10, Wong discloses a method for conducting a transaction at a transaction card reader, the method comprising:
receiving a communication from an encoded portion (102 – EMV chip) of a transaction card (100 – payment card) at the transaction card reader (202 – payment card reader device), wherein the communication comprises a complete transaction card number stored on the encoded portion, and wherein the complete transaction card number includes a personalized indicia [0028, 0031, & 0034];
receiving a biometric input collected by a biometric sensor on the transaction card at the transaction card reader [0028 & 0031];
transmitting the complete transaction card number and the biometric input to an issuer of the transaction card for authorization of the transaction [0028, 0031, & 0034];
receiving an authorization response from the issuer of the transaction card at the transaction card reader [0031 & 0035]; and
generating an authorization notification at the transaction card reader [0031 & 0035].
Regarding claim 11, Wong discloses the method of claim 10, wherein receiving the communication and receiving the biometric input occur simultaneously [0028 & 0034].
Regarding claim 12, Wong discloses the method of claim 10, wherein generating the authorization notification comprises displaying only the personalized indicia portion of the complete transaction number [0028, 0031, & 0034].
Regarding claim 13, Wong discloses the method of claim 10, wherein the biometric input comprises a fingerprint scan, a facial recognition scan, or any combination thereof [0027 & 0028].
Regarding claim 14, Wong discloses the method of claim 10, wherein the authorization response and the authorization notification are indicative of an approval of the transaction, thereby completing the transaction [0031 & 0035].
Regarding claim 15, Wong discloses the method of claim 10, wherein the authorization response and the authorization notification are indicative of a denial of the transaction, thereby voiding the transaction [0028, 0029, & 0031].
Regarding claim 16, Wong discloses a method for conducting a transaction at a transaction card reader, the method comprising:
receiving a communication from an encoded portion (102 – EMV chip) of a transaction card (100 – payment card) at the transaction card reader (202 – payment card reader device), wherein the communication comprises a complete transaction card number stored on the encoded portion, and wherein the complete transaction card number includes a personalized indicia [0028, 0031, & 0034];
transmitting the complete transaction card number to an issuer of the trans- action card for an initial authorization of the transaction [0027-0029, 0031, & 0034];
receiving an initial authorization response from the issuer of the transaction card at the transaction card reader [0031 & 0035];
generating an initial authorization notification at the transaction card reader [0031 & 0035];
receiving a biometric input collected by a biometric sensor on the transaction card at the transaction card reader [0028 & 0031];
transmitting the biometric input to the issuer of the transaction card for a final authorization of the transaction [0028, 0031, & 0034];
receiving a final authorization response from the issuer of the transaction card at the transaction card reader [0031 & 0035]; and
generating a final authorization notification at the transaction card reader [0031 & 0035].
Regarding claim 17, Wong discloses the method of claim 16, wherein generating the initial and final authorization notifications each comprises displaying only the personalized indicia portion of the complete transaction number [0028, 0031, & 0034].
Regarding claim 18, Wong discloses the method of claim 16, wherein the biometric input comprises a fingerprint scan, a facial recognition scan, or any combination thereof [0027 & 0028].
Regarding claim 19, Wong discloses the method of claim 16, wherein the final authorization response and the final authorization notification are indicative of an approval of the transaction, thereby completing the transaction [0031 & 0035].
Regarding claim 20, Wong discloses the method of claim 16, wherein the final authorization response and the final authorization notification are indicative of a denial of the transaction, thereby voiding the transaction [0028, 0029, & 0031].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
3. Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wong in view of Elgar et al. (US 2007/0246526 A1), hereinafter Elgar.
Regarding claim 1, Wong discloses a transaction card (100 – payment card) for secure payments comprising:
a personalized indicia displayed on a first surface or a second surface of the transaction card [0026 & Fig. 1A – disclosing information, such as an account number, expiration date, cardholder’s name, and logo, being printed or embossed on a surface of the payment card];
an encoded portion (102 – EMV chip) configured to communicate with a transaction card reader (202 – payment card reader device), wherein a complete transaction card number associated with the transaction card is stored on the encoded portion [0025, 0027, & Fig. 1A]; and
a biometric sensor (106 – biometric sensor) disposed on the first surface or the second surface, wherein the biometric sensor is configured to communicate with the transaction card reader to complete a transaction [0028, 0029, & 0034].
With respect to claim 1, the teachings of Wong have been discussed above.
Wong is silent with respect to explicitly disclosing that the personalized indicia is user-selected and wherein the personalized indicia does not include personally identifiable information, as recited in claim 1.
Elgar, directed to user-personalized transaction cards [Abstract & 0002-0003], teaches, regarding claim 1, that the personalized indicia is user-selected and wherein the personalized indicia does not include personally identifiable information [0050].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to further employ the personalization features of Elgar within the transaction card of Wong for at least the benefits of providing for enhanced consumer satisfaction, improved security, and increasing card usage by allowing consumers to create a fully personalized and unique user experience.
Regarding claim 2, Wong, as modified above, discloses the transaction card of claim 1, wherein the personalized indicia comprises numbers, letters, or any combination thereof [0026 & Fig. 1A].
Regarding claim 3, Wong, as modified above, discloses the transaction card of claim 1, wherein the complete transaction card number includes the personalized indicia [0028, 0031, & 0034].
Regarding claim 4, Wong, as modified above, discloses the transaction card of claim 3, wherein when the complete transaction card number is transmitted to the transaction card reader for authorizing a payment, only the personalized indicia is displayed on the transaction card reader [0028, 0031, & 0034].
Regarding claim 5, Wong, as modified above, discloses the transaction card of claim 1, wherein a billing address associated with the transaction card is stored on the encoded portion [0027, 0029, & 0034].
Regarding claim 6, Wong, as modified above, discloses the transaction card of claim 1, wherein the encoded portion is a magnetic strip, a contact chip, a contactless chip, or any combination thereof [0025, 0027, & Figs. 1A & 1B].
Regarding claim 7, Wong, as modified above, discloses the transaction card of claim 1, wherein the personalized indicia is displayed on the first surface of the secure transaction card, and further wherein the fingerprint sensor is disposed on the first surface of the secure transaction card [0025 & 0026].
Regarding claim 8, Wong, as modified above, discloses the transaction card of claim 1, wherein the personalized indicia is displayed on the first surface of the secure transaction card, and further wherein the fingerprint sensor is disposed on the second surface of the secure transaction card [0025 & 0026].
Regarding claim 9, Wong, as modified above, discloses the transaction card of claim 1, wherein the biometric sensor comprises a fingerprint sensor, a facial recognition sensor, or any combination thereof [0027 & 0028].
Response to Arguments
4. Applicant's arguments filed 4/13/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues, regarding claim 1, see pages 6-7 of the Remarks, filed 4/13/2026, that Wong fails to disclose "a user-selected personalized indicia displayed on a first surface or a second surface of the transaction card, wherein the personalized indicia does not include personally identifiable information". The limitations regarding the “personalized indicia” being “user-selected” and “wherein the personalized indicia does not include personally identifiable information" where not previously presented. The examiner has provided the teachings of Elgar in combination with Wong to address these limitations and therefore the arguments are moot. Applicant argues, regarding claims 10 & 16, see pages 7-8 of the Remarks, filed 4/13/2026, that Wong fails to disclose "transmitting the complete transaction card number and the biometric input to an issuer of the transaction card for authorization of the transaction", specifically that “Wong does not teach sending biometric input to the issuer”. The examiner respectfully disagrees. Wong clearly discloses, see paragraph [0028], that “the payment card reader device 202 transmits the biometric authentication data, the cardholder identification information and the matching score to the merchant device 204”, and, see paragraph [0031], “then transmits the biometric authentication data and purchase transaction data to that issuer FI 210A. The issuer FI 210A then determines … to authorize or to decline the purchase transaction.” Therefore, Wong’s disclosure of transmitting “biometric authentication data”, which is separate and different from “the cardholder identification information and the matching score”, clearly meeting the claimed limitation of transmitting “the biometric input to an issuer of the transaction card for authorization of the transaction”. The claims have been rejected accordingly.
Conclusion
5. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, 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 PAULTEP SAVUSDIPHOL whose telephone number is (571)270-1301. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F,7-3 EST. If the examiner cannot be reached by telephone, he can be reached through the following email address: paultep.savusdiphol@uspto.gov
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone and email are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Michael G. Lee can be reached on (571) 272-2398. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/PAULTEP SAVUSDIPHOL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876
Prosecution Insights