Digital wallet for the provisioning and management of tokens

Art unit 3691·Examiner Hilmantel, Adam J·Filed Sep 8, 2023·Status since Aug 7, 2026

Applicant Mastercard International Incorporated·Inventor Jeehoon Joshua Cho et al.

Analysis as of Jul 5, 2026

It covers the Office Actions on file on that date and is not updated. The status above is current.

The latest Office Action

Mailed Jul 31, 2025 · Office Action

The USPTO has issued an office action dated July 31, 2025, but the public API data does not yet contain the substantive examination details. This sometimes occurs when an action is very recent or when the document type hasn't been fully processed into the structured database. The examiner of record is Adam J. Hilmantel in Art Unit 3691.

Review the official office action PDF mailed by the USPTO or available in Private PAIR to see the examiner's substantive findings and any rejections. Response deadlines are typically three months from the mailing date, extendable to six months with fees. An attorney typically handles this; if you'd like patentreply.ai to draft a response, click 'Get this drafted'.

Claim status

Pending12 claims1-12

Per-claim view (12 claims)

123

Open 18/463,541 as a matter in your AI.

Connect PatentReply to Claude, ChatGPT, Cursor, or another supported AI workspace and it compiles this application: the 3 Office Actions on file, every claim version, the responses, and the cited references, with each answer pointing back to the filed passage.

One new public application a month is free. The first compile takes a few minutes.

Strategy and filing changes require your approval.

All actions (3)

Office ActionLatest

Jul 31, 2025

Office Action received — structured data incomplete; full examination details not yet available

Procedural framework (13)

MPEP§ 2106.04(II)·§ 2106.04(a)·§ 2106.04(d)·§ 2106.05(I)·§ 2106.05(II)·§ 2106.05(a)·§ 2106.05(d)·§ 2106.05(g)·§ 2106.05(h)·§ 2106.07(a)

Case lawIn Re Keller·In Re Merck·Transmission LLC v. Wells Fargo Bank

Final Office Action

Oct 24, 2024 · §101, §103, §112

Final Office Action — claims 1-3, 5-8, 10-12 rejected under §101, §103, and §112(b)

Because this is a Final Office Action, the applicant has a shortened response window—typically three months from the mail date (October 24, 2024), extendable in one-month increments up to six months total with fees. The applicant must either overcome all rejections through argument and amendment, file a Request for Continued Examination (RCE) to reopen prosecution, or appeal to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. An attorney typically handles this; if you'd like patentreply.ai to draft a response, click 'Get this drafted'.

Rejection groups (3)

§ 101Abstract ideaclaims 1-3, 5-8, 10-12
Claims 1-3, 5-8 and 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Final Office Action mailed Oct 24, 2024
Examiner theory
The claims recites a method and system for a digital wallet for the provisioning and management of tokens. These are a process and machine which are within the four categories of statutory subject matter.
§ 103Obviousnessclaims 1-3, 5-8, 10-12
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-8 and 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brockmann et al. (US 2017/0068952 A1 hereinafter Brockmann) in view of Purves et al. (US 2015/0220914 A1 hereinafter Purves).

Non-Final Office Action

Apr 11, 2024 · §101, §102, §112

Non-Final Office Action — claims 1-10 rejected under §101, §102, and §112(b)

This is a non-final action, so the applicant has three months (extendable to six) to respond. An attorney typically argues that the claims are patent-eligible and not anticipated, amends the claims to distinguish them from Brockmann, and corrects the indefiniteness issues. Sometimes an examiner interview helps clarify positions before filing a written response. An attorney typically handles this; if you'd like patentreply.ai to draft a response, click 'Get this drafted'.

Rejection groups (3)

§ 101Abstract ideaclaims 1-10
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Non-Final Office Action mailed Apr 11, 2024
Examiner theory
The claims recites a method and system for a digital wallet for the provisioning and management of tokens. These are a process and machine which are within the four categories of statutory subject matter.
§ 102(a)(1)Anticipationclaims 1-10
Claim(s) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by Brockmann et al. (US 2017/0068952 A1 hereinafter Brockmann).
Non-Final Office Action mailed Apr 11, 2024

Identifier	Type	Name or author	Link
US20170068952A1	patent publication	Brockmann et al.	View ↗
US20150220914A1	patent publication	Purves et al.	View ↗

Digital wallet for the provisioning and management of tokens

The latest Office Action

Claim status

Open 18/463,541 as a matter in your AI.

Prosecution history

All actions (3)

Office ActionLatest

Final Office Action

Rejection groups (3)

Non-Final Office Action

Rejection groups (3)

Prior art consulted (2)

Objections (1)

Prior art consulted (1)

Objections (1)