Systems and methods for performing payment transactions using indicia-based associations between user interfaces

All Office Actions (4)

Final Office ActionLatest

Apr 17, 2026 · §101, §103

Final Office Action — all claims 1-20 rejected under §101 abstract idea and §103 obviousness

The applicant has three months from April 17, 2026 (extendable to six months with fees) to respond. Typical options include: filing arguments and claim amendments that attempt to overcome both rejections; requesting an examiner interview to discuss claim scope and the §101 concerns; or filing a Request for Continued Examination (RCE) with a submission if amendments are substantial or the examiner refuses entry. An attorney typically handles this; if you'd like patentreply.ai to draft a response, click 'Get this drafted'.

Rejection groups (2)

§ 101Abstract Ideaclaims 1-20

Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more, and fails step 2 of the analysis because the focus of the claims is not on the devices themselves or a practical application but rather directed towards an abstract idea, the analysis is provided below.

§ 103Obviousnessclaims 1-8, 10-16, 18-20

Claim 1-8, 10-16, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Laracey (US Patent Application Publication 20130238455), “Laracey” in view of Phillips, et al. (US Patent Application Publication 20160155112), “Phillips” in view of Lyons, et al. (US Patent Application Publication 20120130889), “Lyons” in view of Chitalia, et al. (US Patent Application Publication 20170236113), “Chitalia”.

Examiner theory

As per claim 1, 11, and 19, Laracey discloses: A computer- implemented method comprising: [0021] generating, by an indicia-based payment server, indicia configured for display at a merchant device of a merchant; [0041-0044], [0055], [0092] For example, the checkout token may be looked up from a table associating a merchant ID (received at 408) with a static checkout token. In some embodiments, the checkout token could be generated by the transaction management system 230 when it receives the merchant payment authorization request at 408, and then the checkout token would be passed back to the merchant system 209 as part of the acknowledgement of the merchant payment authorization request... For example, a customer may operate mobile device 202 to take a digital picture or capture the image

Procedural framework (14)

MPEP§ 2106.05(d)·§ 2111.04·§ 20106.05(f)·§ 20106.05(h)·§ 2106(III)·§ 2106.05(a)·§ 2106.05(f)·§ 2106.05(h)·§ 706.07(a)

Non-Final Office Action after RCE

Nov 20, 2025 · §101, §103

Non-Final Office Action after RCE — all claims 1-20 rejected under §101 abstract idea and §103 obviousness

A response is typically due within three months of the mailing date (extendable to six months with fees). An attorney would typically address both the §101 abstract-idea rejection (by arguing practical application or amending claims to recite concrete technical features) and the §103 obviousness rejections (by arguing the references don't teach certain claim elements or by amending to distinguish over the prior art). Examiner interviews are common at this stage to clarify positions before further amendments. An attorney typically handles this; if you'd like patentreply.ai to draft a response, click 'Get this drafted'.

Rejection groups (3)

§ 101Abstract Ideaclaims 1-20

§ 103Obviousnessclaims 1-8, 10-16, 18-20

Final Office Action

Jun 26, 2025 · §101, §103

Final Office Action — all claims 1-20 rejected under §101 abstract idea and §103 obviousness

Because this is a Final Office Action, the applicant typically has three months (extendable to six with fees) to respond. Common options include filing arguments and amendments (though amendment entry is restricted in a Final), requesting an examiner interview to narrow issues, or filing a Request for Continued Examination (RCE) to reopen prosecution. An attorney typically handles this; if you'd like patentreply.ai to draft a response, click 'Get this drafted'.

Rejection groups (3)

§ 101Abstract Ideaclaims 1-20

§ 103Obviousnessclaims 1-8, 10-16, 18-20

Non-Final Office Action

Jan 14, 2025 · §101, §103, §112

Non-Final Office Action — all claims 1-20 rejected under §101, §103, and §112(b)

This is a non-final action, so the applicant has three months to respond (extendable up to six months with fees). A response typically involves arguing that the claims are patent-eligible under §101 (often by showing a practical application or technical improvement), amending claims to distinguish the prior art, and clarifying the indefinite language in claims 5 and 16. Attorneys often request an examiner interview to discuss the rejections 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 (4)

§ 101Abstract Ideaclaims 1-20

§ 103Obviousnessclaims 1-8, 10-16, 18-20

The latest Office Action

Claim status

Draft a response to this Office Action

Prosecution history

All Office Actions (4)

Final Office ActionLatest

Rejection groups (2)

Non-Final Office Action after RCE

Rejection groups (3)

Final Office Action

Rejection groups (3)

Non-Final Office Action

Rejection groups (4)

Prior art consulted (1)