DETAILED ACTION
Acknowledgments
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This action is in reply to the application filed on 02/13/2026.
Claims 1-15 are currently pending and have been examined.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement filed on 02/13/2026 has been considered. An initialed copy of the Form 1449 is enclosed herewith.
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 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-patent eligible subject matter because the claim(s) as a whole, considering all claim elements both individually and in combination, do not amount to significantly more than an abstract idea.
Step 1:
The claims recite a process, system, apparatus, article of manufacture, and/or a nontransitory storage medium with instructions, each of which are proper statutory categories.
Step 2A (prong 1):
Claim 1:
The claim limitations are grouped as shown immediately following:
a distributed ledger comprising at least one computer configured to communicate with the micropayment system via the communication network, the merchant-participant computer being configured to generate a digital merchant invoice (DMI) in response to a request received from the consumer-participant computer to purchase goods and services and is configured to send the requested DMI to the consumer-participant computer, the consumer-participant computer is configured to generate a digital promise to pay (DPP) based on the received DMI, to add a digital signature of the consumer-participant generated with a private key of the consumer-participant to the DMI, and to send the generated DPP digitally signed by the consumer-participant’s digital signature to the merchant-participant computer, and a computer associated with a transaction service provider approved by the merchant-participant is configured to validate the DPP received from the consumer-participant computer, add a digital signature of the merchant-participant to the validated DPP, the digital signature of the merchant-participant being generated with at least a private key of the merchant-participant, the method comprising: (Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity - fundamental economic principles or practices, business relations or managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people including following rules or instructions)
receiving by the micropayment system from the computer associated with the transaction service provider the DPP that is validated and bearing the digital signature of the merchant-participant, and the digital signature of the consumer-participant (VSDPP); (Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity - fundamental economic principles or practices, business relations or managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people including following rules or instructions)
validating the VSDPP by the micropayment system using at least a public key of the consumer-participant, the VSDPP including information from the DMI from the merchant-participant, the digital signature of the merchant-participant, the digital signature of the consumer-participant, and payment instructions that include an instruction to transfer an amount from an account associated with the consumer-participant to at least an account associated with the merchant-participant, and an instruction to transfer another amount from the account associated with the consumer-participant to at least an account associated with at least one non-participating third party; (Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity - fundamental economic principles or practices, business relations or managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people including following rules or instructions)
sending a message to the merchant-participant computer indicating that the amount payable to the merchant-participant is available by checking an account associated with the consumer-participant; (Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity - fundamental economic principles or practices, business relations or managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people including following rules or instructions)
effecting payment according to payment instructions. (Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity - fundamental economic principles or practices, business relations or managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people including following rules or instructions)
Additional dependent claims 2-15 do not appear remedy the deficiency.
Step 2A (prong 2):
Claim 1:
A method of effecting a transaction with a micropayment platform that includes a merchant-participant comprising at least one merchant-participant computer, a consumer-participant comprising at least one consumer-participant computer configured to communicate with the merchant-participant computer via a communication network, a micropayment system comprising at least one computer configured to communicate with the merchant-participant computer via the communication network, and
These remaining claim limitations are delineated as shown immediately preceding. The abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application. There are no improvements to the functioning of a computer, other technology or technical field, a particular machine is not cited, nothing is transformed to a different state or thing, the abstract idea is not more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the abstract idea. The claim merely uses a computer as a tool to perform the abstract idea, which is generally linked to a particular field of use, in this case, marketing and advertising. Thus, these limitations are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor and memory performing a generic computer function of processing and storing data) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component – MPEP 2106.05(f). Further, receiving data, evaluating data and distributing data are data gathering and data outputting, which has no effect on technology and does no more than generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP 2106.05(h).
Step 2B:
The claim limitations do not provide an Inventive Concept. The claim limitations do not recite additional elements that amount to significantly more that the abstract idea because the additional elements of the system comprising a computer processor, computer readable storage medium with instructions, and a memory configured to store information, each recited at a high level of generality in a computer network which only perform the universal computer functions of accessing, receiving, storing, and processing data, transmitting and presenting information. Taking the elements both individually and as an ordered combination, the function performed by the computer at each step of the process is purely orthodox. Using a computer to obtain and display data are some of the most basic functions of a computer. As shown, the individual limitations claimed are some of the most rudimentary functions of a computer. The technical solution described in this invention does not alter hardware structure or its routine, does not transform the character of the information being processed, does not identify a novel source or type of data, does not advance the functionality of a computer as a tool, and does not incorporate specific rules enabling the computer to accomplish innovative utilities. In summary, the individual step and/or component does no more than require a general computer to perform standard computer functions. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of a computer devices amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component - requiring the use of software to tailor information and provide it to the user on a generic computer, Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Bank (USA), 792 F.3d 1363, 1370-71, 115 USPQ2d 1636, 1642 (Fed. Cir. 2015);
Statutory Double Patenting
A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957).
A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claims 1-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claim 1-15 of prior U.S. Patent No. 12,555,091 B2,. This is a statutory double patenting rejection.
CONCLUSION
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Non-Patent Literature:
Imran Bashir. “Mastering Blockchain Second Edition Distributed ledger technology, decentralization, and smart contracts explained.” (2018). Retrieved online 08/08/2024. https://users.cs.fiu.edu/~prabakar/cen5079/Common/textbooks/Mastering_Blockchain_2nd_Edition.pdf
Sijia Zhao et al. “Applying Blockchain Layer2 Technology to Mass E-Commerce.” (2020). Retrieved online 08/08/2024. https://eprint.iacr.org/2020/502.pdf
Pradip Singh Maharjan et al. “Performance Analysis of Blockchain Platforms Performance Analysis of Blockchain Platforms.” (August 2018). Retrieved online 08/08/2024. https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4370&context=thesesdissertations
Foreign Art:
ROBERTSON et al. “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR IMPLEMENTING FRICTIONLESS MICROPAYMENTS FOR CONSUMABLE SERVICES.” (WO 3050648 A2)
HENN et al. “MICROPAYMENT SYSTEM.” (WO 2097750 A1)
RIVEST et al. “METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR MICROPAYMENT TRANSACTIONS.” (WO 2088874 A2)
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to James A. Reagan (james.reagan@uspto.gov) whose telephone number is 571.272.6710. The Examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday from 9 AM to 5 PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s supervisor, John Hayes, can be reached at 571.272.6708.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal/pair . Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866.217.9197 (toll-free).
Any response to this action should be mailed to:
Commissioner for Patents
PO Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
or faxed to 571-273-8300.
Hand delivered responses should be brought to the United States Patent and Trademark Office Customer Service Window:
Randolph Building
401 Dulany Street
Alexandria, VA 22314.
/JAMES A REAGAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3697
james.reagan@uspto.gov
571.272.6710 (Office)
571.273.6710 (Desktop Fax)
Prosecution Insights