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 .
Response to Amendment
Receipt is acknowledged of applicant’s amendment filed on 6/11/26. Claims 1, 9, and 17 amended. Claims 1-20 are pending and an action on the merits is as follows.
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.
Claim(s) 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Ilincic US Patent No. 10, 607, 216, cited in previous action in view of Thairu et al. US Patent No. 11, 361, 284.
Re Claim 1, Ilincic discloses a method comprising:
receiving, by a computing system, a first payment authorization request (1402; Fig. 14) , wherein the first payment authorization request is generated in response to a contactless communication between a contactless card and a user device of a user (Column 29,lines 26-42, Column 29, line 59-Column 30, line 30, Column 6 lines 25-30, Column 5 lines 36-43, Column 6 , lines 12-18) ;
receiving, by the computing system and from the user device, a second payment authorization request (1406) , wherein the second payment authorization request (1406) is generated in response to receiving card information associated with the contactless card (Column 33, line 58 -column 34 line 5; Column 34 lines 15-21; Fig. 14) ;
verifying, by the computing system, that the contactless card is present at a generation of the second payment authorization request (1406 transaction pre-approval ) based on a condition between the first payment authorization request (1402 message requesting permission for transaction pre-approval) and the second payment authorization request (1406) being met (column 34, lines 15-21); and
transmitting, by the computing system to the user device, an approval of the second payment authorization request in response to verifying that the contactless card is present at the second payment authorization request (Column 34, lines 15-21 and lines 39-41).
Ilincic fails to disclose the first payment authorization request comprising a first payment amount, the second payment authorization request comprising a second payment amount different from the first payment amount.
Thairu discloses the first payment authorization request comprising a first payment amount the second payment authorization request comprising a second payment amount different from the first payment amount (Abstract, Column 22, line 54-Column 23 line 14 and Column 23 line 60-Column 24 line 16).
Given the teachings of Thairu it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Ilincic with the first payment authorization request comprising a first payment amount the second payment authorization request comprising a second payment amount different from the first payment amount.
As suggested by Thairu the settlement process for these transactions can be streamlined, which is beneficial to the multiple parties involved in the transactions.
Re Claim 2, Ilincic and Thairu discloses the method of claim 1, and Ilincic discloses: receiving, by the computing system, the first payment authorization request (1402, Fig. 14) from a second computing system based on a corresponding communication from the user device identifying the contactless communication (Column 29,lines 26-42, Column 29, line 59-Column 30, line 30, Column 6 lines 25-30, Column 5 lines 36-43, Column 6 , lines 12-18; column 29 line 53-56).
Re Claim 3, Ilincic and Thairu discloses the method of claim 1, and Ilincic discloses wherein the first payment authorization request (1402) comprises a first timestamp (Fig. 14, Column 33, lines 1-34 and line 43 )and the second payment authorization request (1406) comprises a second timestamp (Fig. 14, Column 33, lines 1-34 and line 43 servers checks the two messages including indications of their respective times (time stamps ) within the required time interval 5 minutes ).
Re Claim 4, Ilincic and Thairu discloses the method of claim 1, and Ilincic discloses : verifying, by the computing system, the contactless communication based on matching the first payment authorization request and the second payment authorization request (Fig. 14, Column 33, lines 1-34 and line 43 the servers determines whether to allow the transaction or mot , this entails the server determining that the second payment authorization request came from is associated with the same client device /contactless card as the first payment authorization came from is associated with ) .
Re Claim 5, Ilincic and Thairu discloses the method of claim 4, and Ilincic discloses: matching, by the computing system, the first payment authorization request (1402 ) and the second payment authorization (1406) request based on at least one of an internet protocol address, a device identifier, or an identifier of the contactless card (Column 29 lines 52-58, Column 30, lines 15-41, Column 12 lines 45-53, Column 4, lines 36-50, Column 5,lines 21-28, Column 10, lines 57 -Column 11 line 4; column 26, lines 64-Column 27, line 14; column 29, lines 26-42 and Column 30, lines 43-53).
Re Claim 6, Ilincic and Thairu discloses the method of claim 1, and Ilincic discloses wherein the condition between the first payment authorization request and the second payment authorization request being met comprises at least one of a timing threshold or a matching cryptogram (Fig. 14, Column 33, lines 1-34 and line 43 servers checks the two messages including indications of their respective times (time stamps ) within the required time interval 5 minutes and see Column 12, line 54-column 14, line 55; column 14,lines 21-27, Fig. 2).
Re Claim 7, Ilincic and Thairu discloses the method of claim 1, and Ilincic discloses further comprising: providing a graphical user interface (GUI) to the user device that prompts the user to cause the contactless communication between the contactless card and the user device (Column 33,lines 1-35, line 43; Column 34 lines 27-30; Column 29, lines 26-42 and Column 30, lines 43-53).
Re Claim 8, Ilincic and Thairu disclose the method of claim 7, and Ilincic discloses further comprising: causing, by the computing system, presentation of the approval of the second payment authorization request via the GUI (column 33, lines 1-43; column 29, lines 26-42 and Column 30, lines 43-53).
Re Claim 9, Ilincic discloses a system comprising:
one or more processors coupled to a non-transitory memory, the one or more processors configured to:
receive a first payment authorization request (1402; Fig. 14), wherein the first payment authorization request is generated in response to a contactless communication between a contactless card and a user device of a user (Column 29,lines 26-42, Column 29, line 59-Column 30, line 30, Column 6 lines 25-30, Column 5 lines 36-43, Column 6 , lines 12-18);
receive, from the user device, a second payment authorization request (1406), wherein the second payment authorization request (1406) is generated in response to receiving card information associated with the contactless card (Column 33, line 58 -column 34 line 5; Column 34 lines 15-21; Fig. 14).
verify that the contactless card is present at a generation of the second payment authorization request (1406; fig. 14) based on a condition between the first payment authorization request (1402; Fig. 14), and the second payment authorization request (1406; fig. 14) being met (Column 34, lines 15-21); and
transmit to the user device an approval of the second payment authorization request (1406; Fig. 14), in response to verifying that the contactless card is present at the second payment authorization request (Column 34, lines 15-21 and lines 39-41).
Ilincic fails to disclose the first payment authorization request comprising a first payment amount, the second payment authorization request comprising a second payment amount different from the first payment amount.
Thairu discloses the first payment authorization request comprising a first payment amount the second payment authorization request comprising a second payment amount different from the first payment amount (Abstract, Column 22, line 54-Column 23 line 14 and Column 23 line 60-Column 24 line 16).
Given the teachings of Thairu it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Ilincic with the first payment authorization request comprising a first payment amount the second payment authorization request comprising a second payment amount different from the first payment amount.
As suggested by Thairu the settlement process for these transactions can be streamlined, which is beneficial to the multiple parties involved in the transactions.
Re Claim 10, Ilincic and Thairu discloses the system of claim 9, and Ilincic discloses wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: receive the first payment authorization request from a second computing system based on a corresponding communication from the user device identifying the contactless communication (Column 29,lines 26-42, Column 29, line 59-Column 30, line 30, Column 6 lines 25-30, Column 5 lines 36-43, Column 6 , lines 12-18; column 29 line 53-56).
Re Claim 11, Ilincic and Thairu disclose the system of claim 9, and Ilincic discloses wherein the first payment authorization request comprises a first timestamp and the second payment authorization request comprises a second timestamp (Fig. 14, Column 33, lines 1- 43 servers check the two messages including indications of their respective times (time stamps) within the required time interval 5 minutes).
Re Claim 12, Ilincic and Thairu discloses the system of claim 9, and Ilincic discloses wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: verify the contactless communication based on matching the first payment authorization request and the second payment authorization request (Fig. 14, Column 33, lines 1-34 and line 43 the servers determines whether to allow the transaction or mot , this entails the server determining that the second payment authorization request came from is associated with the same client device /contactless card as the first payment authorization came from is associated with ).
Re Claim 13, Ilincic and Thairu discloses the system of claim 12, and Ilincic discloses wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: match the first payment authorization request and the second payment authorization request based on at least one of an internet protocol address, a device identifier, or an identifier of the contactless card (Column 29 lines 52-58, Column 30, lines 15-41, Column 12 lines 45-53, Column 4, lines 36-50, Column 5,lines 21-28, Column 10, lines 57 -Column 11 line 4; column 26, lines 64-Column 27, line 14; column 29, lines 26-42 and Column 30, lines 43-53).
Re Claim 14, Ilincic and Thairu discloses the system of claim 9, and Ilincic discloses wherein the condition between the first payment authorization request and the second payment authorization request being met comprises at least one of a timing threshold or a matching cryptogram (Fig. 14, Column 33, lines 1-34 and line 43 servers checks the two messages including indications of their respective times (time stamps ) within the required time interval 5 minutes and see Column 12, line 54-column 14, line 55; column 14,lines 21-27, Fig. 2).
Re Claim 15, Ilincic and Thairu discloses the system of claim 9, and Ilincic discloses wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: provide a graphical user interface (GUI) to the user device that prompts the user to cause the contactless communication between the contactless card and the user device (Column 33, lines 1-35, line 43; Column 34 lines 27-30; Column 29, lines 26-42 and Column 30, lines 43-53).
Re Claim 16, Ilincic and Thairu disclose the system of claim 15, and Ilincic discloses wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: cause presentation of the approval of the second payment authorization request via the GUI (Column 33, lines 1-35, line 43; Column 34 lines 27-30; Column 29, lines 26-42 and Column 30, lines 43-53). .
Re Claim 17, Ilincic discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising:
receiving a first payment authorization request, wherein the first payment authorization request (1402, Fig. 14) is generated in response to a contactless communication between a contactless card and a user device (Column 29, lines 26-42, Column 29, line 59-Column 30, line 30, Column 6 lines 25-30, Column 5 lines 36-43, Column 6 , lines 12-18);
receiving, from the user device, a second payment authorization request (1406), wherein the second payment authorization request (1406) is generated in response to receiving card information associated with the contactless card (Column 33, line 58 -column 34 line 5; Column 34 lines 15-21; Fig. 14);
verifying that the contactless card is present at a generation of the second payment authorization request based on a condition between the first payment authorization request and the second payment authorization request (1406) being met (Column 34, lines 15-21);
and transmitting to the user device an approval of the second payment authorization request (1406) in response to verifying that the contactless card is present at the second payment authorization request (Column 34, lines 15-21 and lines 39-41).
Ilincic fails to disclose the first payment authorization request comprising a first payment amount, the second payment authorization request comprising a second payment amount different from the first payment amount.
Thairu discloses the first payment authorization request comprising a first payment amount the second payment authorization request comprising a second payment amount different from the first payment amount (Abstract, Column 22, line 54-Column 23 line 14 and Column 23 line 60-Column 24 line 16).
Given the teachings of Thairu it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Ilincic with the first payment authorization request comprising a first payment amount the second payment authorization request comprising a second payment amount different from the first payment amount.
As suggested by Thairu the settlement process for these transactions can be streamlined, which is beneficial to the multiple parties involved in the transactions.
Re Claim 18. Ilincic and Thairu discloses The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 17, and Ilincic discloses wherein the operations further comprise: receiving the first payment authorization request from a second computing system based on a corresponding communication from the user device identifying the contactless communication (Column 29,lines 26-42, Column 29, line 59-Column 30, line 30, Column 6 lines 25-30, Column 5 lines 36-43, Column 6 , lines 12-18; Column 29 line 53-56).
Re Claim 19, Ilincic and Thairu discloses The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 17, and Ilincic discloses wherein the first payment authorization request comprises a first timestamp and the second payment authorization request comprises a second timestamp (Fig. 14, Column 33, lines 1- 43 servers checks the two messages including indications of their respective times (time stamps ) within the required time interval 5 minutes ). .
Re Claim 20, Ilincic and Thairu discloses the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 17, and Ilincic discloses wherein the operations further comprise: verifying the contactless communication based on matching the first payment authorization request and the second payment authorization request (Fig. 14, Column 33, lines 1-34 and line 43 the servers determines whether to allow the transaction or not , this entails the server determining that the second payment authorization request came from is associated with the same client device /contactless card as the first payment authorization came from is associated with ).
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 9, and 17 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant amended the claims with new limitations which necessitated new search and consideration. Therefore, this action is made final.
Conclusion
The following reference is cited but not relied upon:
Grassadonia discloses
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 SONJI N JOHNSON whose telephone number is (571)270-5266. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-9pm.
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, Steven Paik can be reached at 5712722404. 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.
SONJI N. JOHNSON
Examiner
Art Unit 2876
/SONJI N JOHNSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876
Prosecution Insights