101 Rejection Reference Database – Art Unit 3692

EXAMINER: Norman, samica l

Cover-OCO For Legged Order

ASSIGNEE

TRADING TECHNOLOGIES INTERNATIONAL

APPLICATION

16/704,493

PATENT ABSTRACT

A position associated with a synthetic spread order may be managed where a status of a synthetic spread order is identified as legged. The synthetic spread order may have at least one child hedge order pending at an electronic exchange and in response, a bracket order is submitted to an electronic exchange for the tradeable object associated with a filled leg of the synthetic spread. In response to execution of the bracket order, the child hedge order may be cancelled.

REASON FOR 101 REJECTION    |    CTNF 3/2/2020

“A claim drawn to a computer readable medium that covers both transitory and non transitory embodiments may be amended to narrow the claim to cover only statutory embodiments to avoid a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101 by adding the limitation “non-transitory” to the claim. Its not acceptable to just add “physical” or “tangible” – Nuijten’s ineligible signals were physical and tangible.”

Remarks on Overcoming the 101 rejection    |    REM 7/1/2020

“The Applicant respectfully disagrees that the examined claims were directed to non-statutory subject matter. However, to expedite prosecution, the Applicant has amended the pending claims to more clearly recite that they are directed to statutory subject matter.”

EXAMINER: Norman, samica l

ALTERNATIVE FORM FACTOR FOR FINANCIAL INCLUSION

ASSIGNEE

MASTERCARD

APPLICATION

15/286,044

PATENT ABSTRACT

According to some embodiments, apparatus and methods are provided comprising a connector attachment including a housing, wherein the connector attachment is selectively connectable to a mobile device; and a first token stored within the connector attachment, wherein the first token is operative to execute a transaction with a second token. Numerous other aspects are provided.

REASON FOR 101 REJECTION    |    CTNF 10/10/2019

Fundamental economic principle. The way that the token is described in the claims makes it so that under the broadest reasonable interpretation the method could be implemented with the use of generic computer components. Additionally, the claims do not provide additional elements that would be sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.

Remarks on Overcoming the 101 rejection    |    REM 1/8/2020

The focus of the patent involves the mitigation of risk in online and offline data transactions. The solution proposed is an enabled token stored on an attachment. The applicants demonstrate an improvement to traditional credit and debit cards by removing the need for a bank and allowing the user to store their funds personally to their own device. The improvement of risk mitigation in transactions for “unbanked  consumers”. “The claimed process allows a user to execute transactions with good-funds in a reliable manner without using a conventional debit or credit card, which the prior art systems were previously not equipped to do”

EXAMINER: Norman, samica l

MULTI-CURRENCY TRANSACTION ROUTING PLATFORM FOR PAYMENT PROCESSING SYSTEM

ASSIGNEE

MASTERCARD

APPLICATION

14/873,440

PATENT ABSTRACT

According to some embodiments, a multi-currency transaction routing apparatus may include a first input to receive, from an acquirer bank, an electronic message containing information about a business as usual transaction including a generic primary account number. The multi-currency transaction routing apparatus may also include a storage device storing: (i) an association between the generic primary account number and a first primary account number of a first funding bank account in a first currency, and (ii) an association between the generic primary account number and a second primary account number of a second funding bank account in a second currency. A routing module computer may detect the generic primary account number within the electronic message and automatically transmit data about the transaction to a remote device associated with one of the first and second funding bank accounts in accordance with the associations stored in the storage device.

REASON FOR 101 REJECTION    |    CTFR 5/22/2018

Non-statutory subject matter, this is one that spans the 2019 guidelines. This means that the reason the 101 rejections were brought up is instead argued under the new guidelines.

Remarks on Overcoming the 101 rejection    |    APDR 2/26/2020

BPAI Decision: Examiner reversed. The disclosed method limited the use of the judicial exception of fundamental economic principles. 

Specifically, the additional elements limit the conventional practice of transacting multi-currency payments by reciting a “multi-currency transaction routing platform” that routes to one oftwo accounts, where each account has a different currency (first and second currencies). As explained in the  specification, these limitations provide an instrument holder with one single payment card “all his or [her] currency exchange rate transactions” as “a universal multicurrency solution to all of his or her foreign travel needs.” Spec. 8: 13-16. The Specification further discloses that the claimed “routing platform that may enable a card provider to efficiently and intelligently use multi currencies to fund his or her card purchase transactions.” Spec. 13:13-16. Thus, the use of the multi-currency platform with two accounts and two currencies tied to a single generic account provides a technological improvement over prior multi-currency payment systems. See also Ex parte Smith, Appeal 2018-000064 (PTAB Jan. 31, 2019) (designated informative Mar. 19, 2019) (“the use of the claimed timing mechanisms and the associated temporary restraints on execution of trades provide a specific technological improvement over prior derivatives trading systems.”).

EXAMINER: Norman, samica l

DISTRIBUTING WORK LOAD OF HIGH-VOLUME PER SECOND TRANSACTIONS RECORDED TO APPEND-ONLY LEDGERS

ASSIGNEE

DOMUS TOWER

APPLICATION

15/078,768

PATENT ABSTRACT

Various of the disclosed embodiments concern systems and methods for expediting the settlement of securities traded on an exchange. A settlement system can generate electronic records of financial transactions by bundling a trade report, clearing instructions, etc., into a cryptographic ledger. Current cryptographic ledgers do not handle transactions at the rate which securities are traded. In order to improve rate processing for cryptographic ledgers sharded transaction trees are used.

REASON FOR 101 REJECTION    |    CTFR 5/23/2019

Claim 5 is directed to a method that is not (1) tied to another statutory class of invention (such as a particular apparatus) nor (2) transforms underlying subject matter (such as an article or materials) to a different state or thing

Remarks on Overcoming the 101 rejection    |    REM 8/13/2019

Applicant submits that claim 5 has been amended to clarify that the claimed invention is a method performed by a processor for implementing an append-only cryptographic ledger and various other components. For at least the reasons provided, Applicant submits that the grounds for the rejections are no longer applicable. Therefore, withdrawal of the rejections is respectfully requested.

EXAMINER: Norman, samica l

METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR CREDITS IN A SOCIAL NETWORK

ASSIGNEE

MASTERCARD

APPLICATION

15/237,184

PATENT ABSTRACT

A method for verification of user identity includes: storing account profiles, each profile including data related to a user account of a non-financial institution (NFI) entity including an account identifier and an address; receiving a transaction request, the request including a specific account identifier and a transaction amount; identifying an account profile including the specific account identifier; generating a controlled payment number associated with a transaction account of the NFI entity; transmitting a notification to a third party entity including the specific account identifier; transmitting the controlled payment number to a user associated with the user account related to the specific account profile; receiving a data message from the third party entity including the specific account identifier and identification data associated with the user; and updating the specific account profile to include the controlled payment number, the identification data, and a spending limit based on the transaction amount.

REASON FOR 101 REJECTION    |    CTFR 7/19/2019

Rejected for organizing human activity due to the nature of the claim merely sending request messages between entities. Further the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because under the broadest reasonable interpretation the method could be performed on a generic computing device.

Remarks on Overcoming the 101 rejection    |    REM 10/21/2019

2A.P1: applicant asserts that it does not claim a judicial exception and even if it did, by demonstrating an improvement to existing technology there is clearly a practical application

2A.P2 The application integrates the judicial exception into a practical application by enabling users to conduct transactions with non-financial institutions (NFI) to make any changes to their technical systems, verifies user identity without the NFI entity to operate as a financial institution and enables the regular transaction of traditional payment systems without the need for an alteration of the systems hardware. By demonstrating the improvement of the system it is clear there is a practical application for the alleged judicial exception.

EXAMINER: Norman, samica l

MOBILE WALLET ELEMENT MANAGEMENT

ASSIGNEE

WELLS FARGO

APPLICATION

15/669446

PATENT ABSTRACT

“Disclosed in some examples are improved methods, systems, and machine-readable mediums that allow for organization and management of electronic wallets. Users may have parent wallet elements which may include one or more child wallet elements. When a user selects a parent wallet element, the parent wallet element includes one or more selection and usage rules which automatically selects an appropriate child wallet element to use in an appropriate situation. For example, when the parent wallet element is presented as payment at a merchant, the rules may be utilized to select one or more child payment elements. The rules may select the child element based upon transaction type (e.g., at a merchant the rules may select a payment element, at an identification station, choose an identification element), or other context of the user—e.g., selecting a particular payment element based upon the type of merchant, the amount of the transaction, the goods purchased, the date, the time, or the like.”

REASON FOR 101 REJECTION    |    CTNF 7/16/2020

The claims encompass using rules to determine if a transaction can be completed, which under its broadest reasonable interpretation is a fundamental economic practice. The specification does not disclose the problem being solved as providing a wallet, rather the specification states that users with many mobile wallet elements may not appreciate a cluttered mobile wallet environment. It is unclear how the claimed invention is a technical solution to the technical problem of a cluttered mobile environment.

Additional examples of fundamental economic principles not discussed in MPEP 20106.04(a)(2):

-placing an order based on displayed market information (Trading Technologies v IBG)

The Applicant also cites Subject Matter Eligibility Example 42: Method for Transmission of Notifications When Medical Records Are Updated

Remarks on Overcoming the 101 rejection    |    REM 10/16/2020

The applicant points out that the claims recite limitations that the activity performed by the user is what determines what child wallets are to be enabled, additionally the mobile wallet may still be used when the system is not activated and available for use when the activity goal has not been met. This demonstrates integrating any abstract idea into a practical application.

The claims are not directed to a fundamental economic principle, the examiner misconstruces the determination of completing a transaction  instead of the management of access to elements of a mobile wallet. The functioning and limitations of a mobile wallet is a technological field. The wallet element used to complete a transaction is identified earlier in the claims as a “proximity card non-payment mobile wallet element.”

When you visit our website, it may store information through your browser from specific services, usually in form of cookies.