SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ELECTRONIC CERTIFICATION OF E-COMMERCE SECURITY BADGES

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 This action is in reply to the application filed on 11/10/2025, which is a CON of application 18/632614, issued as US 12,488,335, wherein: Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been examined. 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 timewise 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 conflicting claims 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); 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 §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) 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 USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) 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 www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp. Claims 1-20 of Application 19/384606 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over: claims 1-20 of US Patent No. 11,295,301. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the ‘301 Patent recite all the limitations of claims 1-20 of the instant Application No. 19/384606 as indicated in the comparison table below. Claims of 19/384,606 Claims of 11,295,301 1. A computer-implemented method for generating an interoperable global seal for managing secure processing of electronic transactions, the method comprising: receiving, by a server, a request for a security verifier to be displayed on an electronic display of a third-party computing system; transmitting, by the server, a request for security credentials associated with the third-party computing system to one or more security service providers; receiving, by the server, a plurality of security credentials from a subset of security service providers among the one or more security service providers; determining, by the server, that at least one subset of security credentials among the plurality of security credentials meets a network security threshold; and generating and transmitting, by the server, a plurality of uniform resource locators (URLs) unique to each of the one or more security service providers associated with the at least one subset of security credentials based on the plurality of security credentials meeting the network security threshold, wherein each of the plurality of URLs include a generated interoperable global seal for display on the electronic display of the third-party computing system. 1. A method for managing secure processing of electronic payment transactions, comprising: verifying, for each security service provider among a plurality of security service providers, that the security service provider meets a predetermined security standard; receiving, by a server, a request from a merchant computing system for a security verifier, wherein the server and the merchant computing system are interconnected via an electronic network, the security verifier to be displayed on an electronic display of the merchant computing system; transmitting, by the server, a request for security credentials associated with the merchant computing system to each security service provider among the plurality of security service providers; receiving, by the server, a plurality of security credentials from a subset of security service providers among the plurality of security service providers; determining, by the server, whether at least one security service provider among the subset of security service providers was verified to meet the predetermined security standard; determining, by the server, whether at least one set of security credentials among the plurality of security credentials meets a network security threshold; upon determining, by the server, that the at least one security service provider was verified to meet the predetermined security standard and that at least one set of security credentials among the plurality of security credentials meets the network security threshold; generating, by the server, a uniform resource locator (“URL”), wherein the server hosts each of the generated URL and a global certified number unique to the security service provider, the URL generated based on the set of security credentials meeting the network security threshold; transmitting, by the server, the generated URL to the merchant computing system; and displaying the security verifier on the electronic display of the merchant computing system using the generated URL; receiving a request originating from a user interaction with the URL; responding to the request with security information, the security information including one or more of: information that the security service provider associated with the merchant computing system meets the network security threshold, or information about a global registry of certified security service providers; transmitting, by the server, a renewed request for the set of security credentials from the at least one security service provider among the subset of security service providers to measure against the network security threshold; receiving, in response to the renewed request, the set of security credentials from the at least one security service provider among the subset of security service providers; determining, by the server, whether the set of security credentials meets the network security threshold; and proceeding, by the server and based on the set of security credentials not meeting the network security threshold, to i) revoke access to the generated URL and ii) deny display of the security verifier on the electronic display of the merchant computing system. 2. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising: determining, by the server, that the at least one subset of security credentials does not continue to meet the network security threshold; and revoking, by the server, access to the plurality of URLs and/or the display of the interoperable global seal based on the at least one subset of security credentials not continuing to meet the network security threshold. 1…determining, by the server, whether the set of security credentials meets the network security threshold; and proceeding, by the server and based on the set of security credentials not meeting the network security threshold, to i) revoke access to the generated URL and ii) deny display of the security verifier on the electronic display of the merchant computing system. 3. The computer-implemented method of claim 2, further comprising: transmitting, by the server, a renewed request for the at least one subset of security credentials from at least one security service provider among the subset of security service providers to measure against the network security threshold; and granting, by the server, renewed access to the plurality of URLs and/or the display of the interoperable global seal based on the at least one subset of security credentials of the renewed request meeting the network security threshold. 1…transmitting, by the server, a renewed request for the set of security credentials from the at least one security service provider among the subset of security service providers to measure against the network security threshold; receiving, in response to the renewed request, the set of security credentials from the at least one security service provider among the subset of security service providers; determining, by the server, whether the set of security credentials meets the network security threshold… 6. The method of claim 1, wherein the renewed request for the set of security credentials from the at least one security service provider among the subset of security service providers to measure against the network security threshold is transmitted at periodic intervals. 4. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the one or more security service providers provide the at least one subset of security credentials to the server via a web service application programming interface (API). 5. The method of claim 1, wherein the at least one security service provider provides the set of security credentials to the server via a web service application programming interface (“API”). 5. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein an electronic transaction is securely processed via a URL of the plurality of URLs including the interoperable global seal. 1… displaying the security verifier on the electronic display of the merchant computing system using the generated URL; receiving a request originating from a user interaction with the URL; responding to the request with security information, the security information including one or more of: information that the security service provider associated with the merchant computing system meets the network security threshold, or information about a global registry of certified security service providers; 6. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the interoperable global seal is displayed on a display area of the electronic display of the third-party computing system. 1…the security verifier to be displayed on an electronic display of the merchant computing system;…generating, by the server, a uniform resource locator (“URL”), wherein the server hosts each of the generated URL and a global certified number unique to the security service provider, the URL generated based on the set of security credentials meeting the network security threshold; transmitting, by the server, the generated URL to the merchant computing system; and displaying the security verifier on the electronic display of the merchant computing system using the generated URL; 7. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the interoperable global seal is an interactive element for display on the electronic display of the third-party computing system. 1…displaying the security verifier on the electronic display of the merchant computing system using the generated URL; receiving a request originating from a user interaction with the URL… 8. A computing system comprising: a memory having processor-readable instructions stored therein; and a processor configured to access the memory and execute the processor-readable instructions, which when executed by the processor cause the processor to perform a method for generating an interoperable global seal for managing secure processing of electronic transactions, the method comprising: receiving, by a server, a request for a security verifier to be displayed on an electronic display of a third-party computing system; transmitting, by the server, a request for security credentials associated with the third-party computing system to one or more security service providers; receiving, by the server, a plurality of security credentials from a subset of security service providers among the one or more security service providers; determining, by the server, that at least one subset of security credentials among the plurality of security credentials meets a network security threshold; and generating and transmitting, by the server, a plurality of uniform resource locators (URLs) unique to each of the one or more security service providers associated with the at least one subset of security credentials based on the plurality of security credentials meeting the network security threshold, wherein each of the plurality of URLs include a generated interoperable global seal for display on the electronic display of the third-party computing system. 15. A computing system for managing secure processing of electronic payment transactions, the computing system comprising: a memory having processor-readable instructions stored therein; and a processor configured to access the memory and execute the processor-readable instructions, which when executed by a processor cause the processor to perform a plurality of functions, including functions to: verify, for each security service provider among a plurality of security service providers, that the security service provider meets a predetermined security standard; receive, by a server, a request from a merchant computing system for a security verifier, wherein the server and the merchant computing system are interconnected via an electronic network, the security verifier to be displayed on an electronic display of the merchant computing system; transmit, by the server, a request for security credentials associated with the merchant computing system to each security service provider among the plurality of security service providers; receive a plurality of security credentials from a subset of security service providers among the plurality of security service providers; determine, by the server, whether at least one security service provider among the subset of security service providers was verified to meet the predetermined security standard; determine, by the server, whether at least one set of security credentials among the plurality of security credentials meets a network security threshold; upon determining, by the server, that the at least one security service provider was verified to meet the predetermined security standard and that at least one set of security credentials among the plurality of security credentials meets the network security threshold: generate, by the server, a uniform resource locator (“URL”), wherein the server hosts each of the generated URL and a global certified number unique to the security service provider; transmit, by the server, the generated URL to the merchant computing system; and displaying the security verifier on the electronic display of the merchant computing system using the generated URL; receive a request originating from a user interaction with the URL; respond to the request with security information, the security information including one or more of: information that the security service provider associated with the merchant computing system meets the network security threshold, or information about a global registry of certified security service providers; transmit, by the server, a renewed request for the set of security credentials from the at least one security service provider among the subset of security service providers to measure against the network security threshold; in response to the renewed request, receive the set of security credentials from the at least one security service provider among the subset of security service providers; determine, by the server, whether the set of security credentials meets the network security threshold; and based on the set of security credentials not meeting the network security threshold, proceed to i) revoke access to the generated URL and ii) deny display of the security verifier on the electronic display of the merchant computing system. 9. The computing system of claim 8, the method further comprising: determining, by the server, that the at least one subset of security credentials does not continue to meet the network security threshold; and revoking, by the server, access to the plurality of URLs and/or the display of the interoperable global seal based on the at least one subset of security credentials not continuing to meet the network security threshold. 15… determine, by the server, whether the set of security credentials meets the network security threshold; and based on the set of security credentials not meeting the network security threshold, proceed to i) revoke access to the generated URL and ii) deny display of the security verifier on the electronic display of the merchant computing system. 10. The computing system of claim 9, the method further comprising: transmitting, by the server, a renewed request for the at least one subset of security credentials from at least one security service provider among the subset of security service providers to measure against the network security threshold; and granting, by the server, renewed access to the plurality of URLs and/or the display of the interoperable global seal based on the at least one subset of security credentials of the renewed request meeting the network security threshold. 15… transmit, by the server, a renewed request for the set of security credentials from the at least one security service provider among the subset of security service providers to measure against the network security threshold; in response to the renewed request, receive the set of security credentials from the at least one security service provider among the subset of security service providers; determine, by the server, whether the set of security credentials meets the network security threshold; and 13. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 8, wherein the renewed request for the set of security credentials from the at least one security service provider among the subset of security service providers to measure against the network security threshold is transmitted at periodic intervals. 11. The computing system of claim 8, wherein the one or more security service providers provide the at least one subset of security credentials to the server via a web service application programming interface (API). 19. The system of claim 15, wherein the at least one security service provider provides the set of security credentials to the server via a web service application programming interface (“API”). 12. The computing system of claim 8, wherein an electronic transaction is securely processed via a URL of the plurality of URLs including the interoperable global seal. 15…displaying the security verifier on the electronic display of the merchant computing system using the generated URL; receive a request originating from a user interaction with the URL; respond to the request with security information, the security information including one or more of: information that the security service provider associated with the merchant computing system meets the network security threshold, or information about a global registry of certified security service providers 13. The computing system of claim 8, wherein the interoperable global seal is displayed on a display area of the electronic display of the third-party computing system. 15…the security verifier to be displayed on an electronic display of the merchant computing system;… generate, by the server, a uniform resource locator (“URL”), wherein the server hosts each of the generated URL and a global certified number unique to the security service provider; transmit, by the server, the generated URL to the merchant computing system; and displaying the security verifier on the electronic display of the merchant computing system using the generated URL; 14. The computing system of claim 8, wherein the interoperable global seal is an interactive element for display on the electronic display of the third-party computing system. 15…displaying the security verifier on the electronic display of the merchant computing system using the generated URL; receive a request originating from a user interaction with the URL; 15. A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing programming instructions causing a computing system to execute a method for generating an interoperable global seal for managing secure processing of electronic transactions, the method comprising: receiving, by a server, a request for a security verifier to be displayed on an electronic display of a third-party computing system; transmitting, by the server, a request for security credentials associated with the third-party computing system to one or more security service providers; receiving, by the server, a plurality of security credentials from a subset of security service providers among the one or more security service providers; determining, by the server, that at least one subset of security credentials among the plurality of security credentials meets a network security threshold; and generating and transmitting, by the server, a plurality of uniform resource locators (URLs) unique to each of the one or more security service providers associated with the at least one subset of security credentials based on the plurality of security credentials meeting the network security threshold, wherein each of the plurality of URLs include a generated interoperable global seal for display on the electronic display of the third-party computing system. 8. A non-transitory computer readable medium storing a program causing a computer to execute a method for managing secure processing of electronic payment transactions, the method comprising: verifying, for each security service provider among a plurality of security service providers, that the security service provider meets a predetermined security standard; receiving, by a server, a request from a merchant computing system for a security verifier, wherein the server and the merchant computing system are interconnected via an electronic network, the security verifier to be displayed on an electronic display of the merchant computing system; transmitting, by the server, a request for security credentials associated with the merchant computing system to each security service provider among the plurality of security service providers; receiving a plurality of security credentials from a subset of security service providers among the plurality of security service providers; determining, by the server, whether at least one security service provider among the subset of security service providers was verified to meet the predetermined security standard; determining, the server, whether at least one set of security credentials among the plurality of security credentials meets a network security threshold; upon determining, by the server, that the at least one security service provider was verified to meet the predetermined security standard and that at least one set of security credentials among the plurality of security credentials meets the network security threshold: generating, by the server, a uniform resource locator (“URL”), wherein the server hosts each of the generated URL and a global certified number unique to the security service provider; transmitting, by the server, the generated URL to the merchant computing system; and displaying the security verifier on the electronic display of the merchant computing system using the generated URL; receiving a request originating from a user interaction with the URL; responding to the request with security information, the security information including one or more of: information that the security service provider associated with the merchant computing system meets the network security threshold, or information about a global registry of certified security service providers; transmitting, by the server, a renewed request for the set of security credentials from the at least one security service provider among the subset of security service providers to measure against the network security threshold; in response to the renewed request, receiving the set of security credentials from the at least one security service provider among the subset of security service providers; determining, by the server, whether the set of security credentials meets the network security threshold; and based on the set of security credentials not meeting the network security threshold, proceeding, by the server, to i) revoke access to the generated URL and ii) deny display of the security verifier on the electronic display of the merchant computing system. 16. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 15, the method further comprising: determining, by the server, that the at least one subset of security credentials does not continue to meet the network security threshold; and revoking, by the server, access to the plurality of URLs and/or the display of the interoperable global seal based on the at least one subset of security credentials not continuing to meet the network security threshold. 8…determining, by the server, whether the set of security credentials meets the network security threshold; and based on the set of security credentials not meeting the network security threshold, proceeding, by the server, to i) revoke access to the generated URL and ii) deny display of the security verifier on the electronic display of the merchant computing system. 17. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 16, the method further comprising: transmitting, by the server, a renewed request for the at least one subset of security credentials from at least one security service provider among the subset of security service providers to measure against the network security threshold; and granting, by the server, renewed access to the plurality of URLs and/or the display of the interoperable global seal based on the at least one subset of security credentials of the renewed request meeting the network security threshold. 8…transmitting, by the server, a renewed request for the set of security credentials from the at least one security service provider among the subset of security service providers to measure against the network security threshold; in response to the renewed request, receiving the set of security credentials from the at least one security service provider among the subset of security service providers; determining, by the server, whether the set of security credentials meets the network security threshold 18. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 15, wherein the one or more security service providers provide the at least one subset of security credentials to the server via a web service application programming interface (API). 19. The system of claim 15, wherein the at least one security service provider provides the set of security credentials to the server via a web service application programming interface (“API”). 19. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 15, wherein an electronic transaction is securely processed via a URL of the plurality of URLs including the interoperable global seal. 8…displaying the security verifier on the electronic display of the merchant computing system using the generated URL; receiving a request originating from a user interaction with the URL; responding to the request with security information, the security information including one or more of: information that the security service provider associated with the merchant computing system meets the network security threshold, or information about a global registry of certified security service providers 20. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 15, wherein the interoperable global seal is displayed on a display area of the electronic display of the third-party computing system. 8…displaying the security verifier on the electronic display of the merchant computing system using the generated URL; receiving a request originating from a user interaction with the URL;… 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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims recite a server and method for creating a transaction account which is considered a judicial exception because it falls under Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity such as fundamental economic principles or practices, including mitigating risk. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application as discussed below and the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception as discussed below. This rejection follows the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, 84 Fed Reg 4, January 7, 2019, pp. 50-57 (“2019 PEG”)(MPEP 2106). Analysis Step 1 (Statutory Categories) – 2019 PEG pg. 53 (See MPEP 2106.03) Claims 1-20 are directed to the statutory category of a process, machine, or manufacture. Step 2A, Prong 1 (Do the claims recite an abstract idea?) – 2019 PEG pg. 54 (See MPEP 2106.04(a)-(c)) For independent claims 1, 8, and 15, the claims recite an abstract idea of: managing secure processing of electronic payment transactions. The steps of independent claim 8 recite the abstract idea (in bold below) of: A computing system comprising: a memory having processor-readable instructions stored therein; and a processor configured to access the memory and execute the processor-readable instructions, which when executed by the processor cause the processor to perform a method for generating an interoperable global seal for managing secure processing of electronic transactions, the method comprising: receiving, by a server, a request for a security verifier to be displayed on an electronic display of a third-party computing system; transmitting, by the server, a request for security credentials associated with the third-party computing system to one or more security service providers; receiving, by the server, a plurality of security credentials from a subset of security service providers among the one or more security service providers; determining, by the server, that at least one subset of security credentials among the plurality of security credentials meets a network security threshold; and generating and transmitting, by the server, a plurality of uniform resource locators (URLs) unique to each of the one or more security service providers associated with the at least one subset of security credentials based on the plurality of security credentials meeting the network security threshold, wherein each of the plurality of URLs include a generated interoperable global seal for display on the electronic display of the third-party computing system. Independent claims 1 and 15 recite similar steps that recite the abstract idea. Independent claims 1, 8, and 15, as drafted, are a process that, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, covers Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity, since they recite fundamental economic principles or practices including mitigating risk. If the claim limitations, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, covers methods of organizing human activity but for the recitation of additional elements including generic computer components, then it falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Other than reciting the abstract idea, the independent claims recite additional elements including generic computer components such as “a computing system, a memory, a processor, an interoperable global seal, a server, a security verifier, an electronic display, a third party computing system, security service providers, uniform resource locators (URLs), and a non-transitory computer-readable medium”, and nothing in the claims precludes the steps from being performed as a method of organizing human activity. Accordingly, the independent claims recite an abstract idea. Dependent claims 2-7, 9-14, and 16-20 recite similar limitations as independent claims 1, 8, and 15; and when analyzed as a whole are held to be patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C 101 because the additional recited limitations only refine the abstract idea further. Other than reciting the abstract idea, the dependent claims recite similar additional elements including generic computer components as the independent claims, such as “the computing system, the interoperable global seal, the electronic display, the third party computing system, the URLs, the security service providers, the server, an application programming interface (API), and the non-transitory computer-readable medium”. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers fundamental economic principles, but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Step 2A, Prong 2 (Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application?) – 2019 PEG pg. 54 (See MPEP 2106.04(d)-(c)) This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, independent claims 1, 8, and 15 only recite the additional elements of “a computing system, a memory, a processor, an interoperable global seal, a server, a security verifier, an electronic display, a third party computing system, security service providers, uniform resource locators (URLs), and a non-transitory computer-readable medium”. A plain reading of the Figures and associated descriptions in the specification reveals that generic processors may be used to execute the claimed steps. The additional elements are recited at a high level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing generic computer functions) such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components (See MPEP 2106.05(f)) and limits the judicial exception to a particular environment (See MPEP 2106.05(h)). Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component and limiting the judicial exception to a particular environment doesn’t integrate the abstract idea into a practical application in Step 2A. Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Hence, independent claims 1, 8, and 15 are directed to an abstract idea. Dependent claims 2-7, 9-14, and 16-20, recite similar additional elements as the independent claims including generic computer components, such as “the computing system, the interoperable global seal, the electronic display, the third party computing system, the URLs, the security service providers, the server, an application programming interface (API), and the non-transitory computer-readable medium”. The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional elements in the dependent claims are also recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts to more no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Therefore, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they also do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Also, the claims do not affect an improvement to another technology or technical field; the claims do not amount to an improvement of the functioning of a computer system itself; the claims do not effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing; and the claims do not move beyond a general link of the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Step 2B (Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception?) – 2019 PEG pg. 56 (See MPEP 2106.05) Independent claims 1, 8, and 15 do 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 recited additional elements amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (See MPEP 2106.05(f)) and limits the judicial exception to the particular environment of computers (See MPEP 2106.05(h)). The additional elements of the instant underlying process, when taken in combination, together do not offer substantially more than the sum of the function of the elements when each is taken alone. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept in Step 2B. In addition, the dependent claims 2-7, 9-14, and 16-20 do 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 elements of the dependent claims to perform the claimed limitations, amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (See MPEP 2106.05(f)). Similar to the independent claims, mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. Also, for the same reasoning as the independent claims, the additional elements of the limitations of the dependent claims, when considered individually and as an ordered combination, together do not offer significantly more than the sum of the functions of the elements when each is taken alone and the dependent claims as a whole, do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. For these reasons, the dependent claims also are not patent eligible. Subject Matter Overcoming 35 USC §102/§103 Claims 1-20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 101 set forth in this Office Action, and if rewritten to overcome the double patenting rejections set forth in this Office action. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowable subject matter of independent clams 1, 8, and 15 over prior art. The closest prior art of record is US 2009/0077373 to Kramer (hereinafter referred to as Kramer), US 7,092,912 to Khaishgi et al. (hereinafter referred to as Khaishgi), and US 9,691,089 to Grass et al. (hereinafter referred to as Grass). Allowable subject matter is indicated because none of the prior art of record, alone or in combination, appears to teach or fairly suggest or render obvious the combination set forth in independent claims 1, 8, and 15. For independent claims 1, 8, and 15, the prior art of Kramer, Khaishgi, and Grass specifically do not disclose: transmitting, by the server, a request for security credentials associated with the third-party computing system to one or more security service providers; receiving, by the server, a plurality of security credentials from a subset of security service providers among the one or more security service providers; determining, by the server, that at least one subset of security credentials among the plurality of security credentials meets a network security threshold; and generating and transmitting, by the server, a plurality of uniform resource locators ("URL") unique to each of the one or more security service providers associated with the at least one subset of security credentials; meeting the network security threshold, wherein each of the plurality of URLs include a generated interoperable global seal for display on the electronic display of the third-party computing system. Dependent claims 2-7, 9-14, and 16-20 are allowable over the prior art by virtue of their dependency on an allowed claim. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Paul Schwarzenberg whose telephone number is (313) 446-6611. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday (7:30-6:30). 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, Christine Behncke, can be reached on (571) 272-8103. 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. /PAUL S SCHWARZENBERG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3695 7/30/2026