US 11329973

Technical Analysis of U.S. Patent 11,329,973

Date of Analysis: April 26, 2026

This report provides a concise summary of United States Patent 11,329,973, including its key bibliographic details, abstract, and a plain-language interpretation of its independent claims.

Bibliographic Information

• Title: File format and platform for storage and verification of credentials
• Assignee: Cortex MCP Inc.
• Inventor: Shaunt M. Sarkissian
• Filing Date: June 4, 2020
• Issue Date: May 10, 2022
• Abstract: The patent describes a computer-implemented method for generating and verifying officially verifiable electronic representations of credentials. The method involves storing credential information for a user, receiving a request to generate a file for authentication, and creating a virtual representation of the credential that is verified by an issuing agency. The system then transmits this file and can later verify its authenticity through NFC or Bluetooth-based communication, confirming that the communication corresponds with the user's credential information and sending an authentication message in response.

**Plain-Language Overview of Independent Claims

U.S. Patent 11,329,973 contains three independent claims: 1, 15, and 22. Below is a simplified explanation of the technological territory each claim seeks to protect.

• Independent Claim 1: This claim describes a method for generating and verifying electronic credentials. At its core, the method involves a server system ("credential database") that stores a user's credential information. When requested, this server generates a secure electronic file representing an official credential (like a driver's license or employee ID) after confirming its validity with the original issuer (e.g., the DMV). This electronic credential file is then sent to the user's device. A key feature is the ability for a third party to later verify this electronic credential. The system is designed to check the authenticity of the credential file when presented, for example, via a short-range wireless communication like NFC or Bluetooth, and then send a message back confirming whether it is valid.

• Independent Claim 15: This claim focuses on the user's device (the "client device"). It outlines a method where the user's device requests the creation of an electronic credential. This process can be initiated by the user manually entering credential details or by scanning a code (like a QR code). The device then sends this information to the central server to have the official electronic credential generated and sent back. The claim also covers the device's role in the verification process, where it presents the electronic credential for a third party to check and receives a response indicating if the credential is valid or not, including reasons for invalidity.

• Independent Claim 22: This claim describes the server apparatus itself, which is responsible for the generation and verification of the electronic credentials. It details a system with a processor and memory programmed to maintain the database of credentials. This apparatus receives requests to create or check credentials. When creating a credential, it communicates with the issuing agency's database to get the necessary information and status. It then generates the secure electronic credential file and can tie it to a specific user device for security. For verification, it compares the presented credential information against its records and provides a response about its validity.

In summary, the patent covers a comprehensive system for creating, managing, and verifying digital versions of official credentials. It describes the interactions between the user's device, a central server, and the original credential-issuing agencies to ensure a secure and verifiable digital alternative to physical identification and qualification documents.

It should be noted that court records indicate this patent has been the subject of litigation. A case was filed by Cortex MCP, Inc. against Visa, Inc. in the Western District of Texas, which could have implications for the patent's interpretation and enforceability. The legal status of the patent is listed as active.

Litigation Involving U.S. Patent 11,329,973

U.S. Patent 11,329,973 has been involved in litigation.

1. Cortex MCP, Inc. v. Visa, Inc.

• Plaintiff(s): Cortex MCP, Inc.
• Defendant(s): Visa, Inc.
• Jurisdiction:
  • Initially filed in the Western District of Texas.
  • Transferred to the Northern District of California.
• Case Number:
  • Western District of Texas: 6:23-cv-00048.
  • Northern District of California: 5:23-cv-05720.
• Filing Date: January 26, 2023 (in the Western District of Texas).
• Outcome or Current Status: This case alleges infringement of U.S. Patent 11,329,9973 and other related patents. Visa filed a motion to stay pending resolution of inter partes review (IPR) proceedings challenging all claims of the patents-in-suit, which was granted by the court in the Northern District of California on July 22, 2024. The case was transferred from the Western District of Texas to the Northern District of California on November 3, 2023. A motion to dismiss by Visa was terminated upon transfer and refiled in the new district, remaining pending as of February 22, 2024.

Proceedings overview

One AIA trial proceeding has been filed against US Patent 11,329,973. This proceeding, IPR2024-00490, initially resulted in a Final Written Decision finding all challenged claims unpatentable, but this decision was subsequently vacated-in-part and remanded by Director Review for reconsideration of arguments related to a particular dependent claim. The patent owner is actively appealing related consolidated cases to the Federal Circuit. This gives a defendant a complex defensive posture, as the patent's claims were largely found unpatentable but are currently in a state of partial remand and potential appeal.

IPR2024-00490 — Visa Inc. v. Cortex MCP Inc.

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: 2024-01-26
• Status: Final Written Decision (FWD) issued, then vacated-in-part and remanded for further proceedings by Director Review. This means the patentability of certain claims, particularly one dependent claim, is still under reconsideration by the PTAB.
• Judge panel: The Delegated Director Review decision (Paper 36, November 7, 2025) was before KALYAN K. DESHPANDE, Acting Chief Administrative Patent Judge, MICHAEL W. KIM, Vice Chief Administrative Patent Judge, and JEFFREY W. ABRAHAM, Acting Vice Chief Administrative Patent Judge. Director John Squires granted the initial Director Review on October 15, 2025.
• Petition grounds: Inter partes review was instituted as to all challenged claims and all asserted grounds of unpatentability. While specific prior art references for US11329973 are not detailed in the snippets, related consolidated petitions (IPR2024-00486) targeted claims for obviousness over prior art related to payment tokenization and scannable QR codes.
• Institution decision: Instituted on 2024-08-02 as to all challenged claims and all asserted grounds of unpatentability.
• Final Written Decision (if issued): The initial Final Written Decision found all challenged claims unpatentable. However, on 2025-10-15, Director Review was granted, and the FWD was "vacated-in-part" and "remanded for further consideration where the Board's decision overlooked Patent Owner's arguments regarding a particular dependent claim." A subsequent Delegated Director Review on 2025-11-07 further confirmed the FWD found "All Challenged Claims Unpatentable" while acknowledging the Director Review process. The specific claims still under review due to the remand are not detailed in the provided information.
• Settlement / termination: Not terminated by settlement; an FWD was issued and subsequently subjected to Director Review.
• Appeal: The status for IPR2024-00486, which was consolidated with IPR2024-00490 for Director Review, is listed as "Final Written Decision - Appealed" with appeal number 26-1259. This indicates that the outcome of the Director Review is being appealed to the Federal Circuit.
• Defensive value: Initially, the FWD indicated all challenged claims of US11329973 were unpatentable. However, the subsequent Director Review vacating-in-part and remanding for a specific dependent claim means the patentability of at least that dependent claim is still unsettled. An appeal to the Federal Circuit on the consolidated cases adds further uncertainty. While the initial FWD was a strong blow to the patent owner, the current status means that the final disposition of all claims is not yet determined, and some claims might ultimately be held patentable after the remand or on appeal.

Strategic summary

One IPR proceeding, IPR2024-00490, has been initiated against US Patent 11,329,973 by Visa Inc. The initial Final Written Decision (FWD) in this proceeding, along with consolidated cases IPR2024-00486 and IPR2024-00489, found all challenged claims unpatentable. However, this outcome was not entirely conclusive. On 2025-10-15, Director Review was granted, and the FWD was vacated-in-part and remanded to the PTAB for further consideration of arguments concerning "a particular dependent claim". This means that while the bulk of the challenged claims may still be considered unpatentable based on the original FWD, at least one dependent claim is still subject to reconsideration. As of 2025-11-07, a Delegated Director Review decision was issued related to these consolidated proceedings, but the remand for the dependent claim still stands.

Furthermore, IPR2024-00486, which was part of this consolidated review, is listed as "Final Written Decision - Appealed" to the Federal Circuit under appeal number 26-1259. Given the consolidation and shared Director Review, it is highly probable that the outcome for IPR2024-00490 and US11329973 is also subject to this appeal, or further proceedings are pending at the PTAB following the remand. Therefore, the claims of US11329973, while initially deemed unpatentable, are currently in a state of active review and appeal, meaning no claims are definitively canceled or sustained at this moment, but many are contested. The estoppel landscape is complex due to the partial remand and ongoing appeal; any grounds raised or reasonably could have been raised by Visa Inc. and its privies would be barred under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) for the challenged claims.

Unified Patents, which lists IPR2024-00490 on its portal, is known for its role as a defensive aggregator that files IPRs to deter non-practicing entities. Its involvement suggests a coordinated effort to challenge the patent. The fact that an initial FWD found all claims unpatentable, even with the subsequent remand, indicates significant weaknesses in the patent's claims against the prior art presented by Visa.

Recommended next steps

• Review Director Review Decision: Obtain and thoroughly review Paper 47 (dated 2025-10-15) and Paper 36 (dated 2025-11-07) from the PTAB's Electronic Filing System (E2E) for IPR2024-00490. These documents will provide the specific reasoning for the partial vacatur and remand, including the identity of the "particular dependent claim" under reconsideration. This is crucial for understanding the exact scope of surviving or potentially surviving claims.
• Monitor Federal Circuit Appeal: Closely monitor Federal Circuit appeal 26-1259 (Visa Inc. v. Cortex MCP Inc.) to understand the legal arguments and potential implications for IPR2024-00490. The outcome of this appeal will be highly influential on the ultimate patentability of the claims in US11329973.
• Assess Impact on Assertion: If facing an assertion of US11329973, a defendant should evaluate whether the asserted claims include those initially found unpatentable in the FWD (and not subsequently saved by the remand or appeal). Any infringement theory built on claims definitively found unpatentable by the PTAB (if any are ultimately confirmed as such after remand/appeal) would be significantly weakened.
• Consider Estoppel: The estoppel provisions of 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) will apply to Visa Inc. and its privies. For other potential defendants, grounds of unpatentability not raised, or not reasonably could have been raised, in IPR2024-00490 remain available.

Inventors

• Shaunt M. Sarkissian (Employer: Cortex MCP Inc. at the time of filing, as they are the original assignee). No unusual patterns detected.

Original assignee

The entity named on the issued patent is Cortex MCP Inc.

Cortex MCP Inc. develops software applications for a mobile commerce payment platform, specifically an "IP-protected mobile payment and wallet platform" focused on "payment host tokenization and ID/credential storage." Their website highlights a "Highly Innovative, Patented OVER File™ Technology Solution," indicating a focus on intellectual property related to secure digital credentials. There is no clear public evidence that Cortex MCP Inc. ships a widely available consumer product directly embodying the claims of this patent as its primary line of business; instead, their activities and the patent's litigation history suggest a business model centered on IP monetization. Cortex MCP Inc. is a privately held company. Their current status, as recorded by the USPTO assignment system and confirmed by PitchBook, is operating, but has transferred the patent to an LLC chain.

Assignment timeline

• 2020-05-22 (executed) / recorded 2020-06-03 — Reel 054948/0468

  • Conveyance: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST
  • Assignor: SARKISSIAN, SHAUNT M.
  • Assignee: CORTEX MCP, INC.
  • Correspondent: BROWNING LAW GROUP, P.C. 8880 CAL CENTER DR. SUITE 400 SACRAMENTO, CA 95826
  • Context: Initial assignment from the inventor to the original assignee prior to the patent's filing.

• 2022-09-07 (executed) / recorded 2022-09-08 — Reel 061266/0398

  • Conveyance: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST
  • Assignor: CORTEX MCP, INC.
  • Assignee: CORTEX MCP LLC
  • Correspondent: LORING P. RANDELL LORING P. RANDELL, P.C. 14724 E. LARKSPUR DR. SCOTTSDALE, AZ 85260. This correspondent recurs frequently in this chain.
  • Context: Transfer from an incorporating entity to a numerically-named limited liability company.

• 2023-01-26 (executed) / recorded 2023-01-27 — Reel 062638/0333

  • Conveyance: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST
  • Assignor: CORTEX MCP LLC
  • Assignee: CORTEX MCP II LLC
  • Correspondent: LORING P. RANDELL LORING P. RANDELL, P.C. 14724 E. LARKSPUR DR. SCOTTSDALE, AZ 85260. This correspondent recurs frequently in this chain.
  • Context: Transfer between numerically-named related LLCs, forming a cascading chain.

• 2023-08-01 (executed) / recorded 2023-08-03 — Reel 064434/0071

  • Conveyance: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST
  • Assignor: CORTEX MCP II LLC
  • Assignee: CORTEX MCP III LLC
  • Correspondent: LORING P. RANDELL LORING P. RANDELL, P.C. 14724 E. LARKSPUR DR. SCOTTSDALE, AZ 85260. This correspondent recurs frequently in this chain.
  • Context: Transfer between numerically-named related LLCs, forming a cascading chain.

• 2023-08-25 (executed) / recorded 2023-09-01 — Reel 064706/0890

  • Conveyance: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST
  • Assignor: CORTEX MCP III LLC
  • Assignee: CORTEX MCP IV LLC
  • Correspondent: LORING P. RANDELL LORING P. RANDELL, P.C. 14724 E. LARKSPUR DR. SCOTTSDALE, AZ 85260. This correspondent recurs frequently in this chain.
  • Context: Transfer between numerically-named related LLCs, forming a cascading chain.

• 2023-11-22 (executed) / recorded 2023-11-29 — Reel 065609/0270

  • Conveyance: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST
  • Assignor: CORTEX MCP IV LLC
  • Assignee: CORTEX MCP V LLC
  • Correspondent: LORING P. RANDELL LORING P. RANDELL, P.C. 14724 E. LARKSPUR DR. SCOTTSDALE, AZ 85260. This correspondent recurs frequently in this chain.
  • Context: Transfer between numerically-named related LLCs, forming a cascading chain.

• 2023-12-21 (executed) / recorded 2023-12-29 — Reel 065999/0426

  • Conveyance: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST
  • Assignor: CORTEX MCP V LLC
  • Assignee: CORTEX MCP VI LLC
  • Correspondent: LORING P. RANDELL LORING P. RANDELL, P.C. 14724 E. LARKSPUR DR. SCOTTSDALE, AZ 85260. This correspondent recurs frequently in this chain.
  • Context: Transfer between numerically-named related LLCs, forming a cascading chain.

• 2024-01-25 (executed) / recorded 2024-02-01 — Reel 066314/0839

  • Conveyance: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST
  • Assignor: CORTEX MCP VI LLC
  • Assignee: CORTEX MCP VII LLC
  • Correspondent: LORING P. RANDELL LORING P. RANDELL, P.C. 14724 E. LARKSPUR DR. SCOTTSDALE, AZ 85260. This correspondent recurs frequently in this chain.
  • Context: Transfer between numerically-named related LLCs, forming a cascading chain.

• 2024-03-20 (executed) / recorded 2024-03-27 — Reel 066847/0659

  • Conveyance: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST
  • Assignor: CORTEX MCP VII LLC
  • Assignee: CORTEX MCP VIII LLC
  • Correspondent: LORING P. RANDELL LORING P. RANDELL, P.C. 14724 E. LARKSPUR DR. SCOTTSDALE, AZ 85260. This correspondent recurs frequently in this chain.
  • Context: Transfer between numerically-named related LLCs, forming a cascading chain.

• 2024-04-16 (executed) / recorded 2024-04-24 — Reel 067098/0501

  • Conveyance: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST
  • Assignor: CORTEX MCP VIII LLC
  • Assignee: CORTEX MCP IX LLC
  • Correspondent: LORING P. RANDELL LORING P. RANDELL, P.C. 14724 E. LARKSPUR DR. SCOTTSDALE, AZ 85260. This correspondent recurs frequently in this chain.
  • Context: Transfer between numerically-named related LLCs, forming a cascading chain.

• 2024-05-13 (executed) / recorded 2024-05-20 — Reel 067341/0088

  • Conveyance: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST
  • Assignor: CORTEX MCP IX LLC
  • Assignee: CORTEX MCP X LLC
  • Correspondent: LORING P. RANDELL LORING P. RANDELL, P.C. 14724 E. LARKSPUR DR. SCOTTSDALE, AZ 85260. This correspondent recurs frequently in this chain.
  • Context: Transfer between numerically-named related LLCs, forming a cascading chain.

Timeline diagram

timeline
    title Ownership of US 11329973
    2020 : Filed, assigned to Cortex MCP Inc
    2022 : Issued
         : Assigned to Cortex MCP LLC
    2023 : Assigned to Cortex MCP II LLC
         : Suit filed (Cortex MCP Inc)
         : Assigned to Cortex MCP III LLC
         : Assigned to Cortex MCP IV LLC
         : Assigned to Cortex MCP V LLC
         : Assigned to Cortex MCP VI LLC
    2024 : Assigned to Cortex MCP VII LLC
         : Assigned to Cortex MCP VIII LLC
         : Assigned to Cortex MCP IX LLC
         : Assigned to Cortex MCP X LLC

NPE / troll-pattern signals

1. Shell-entity transfer — present. The patent has been transferred through a series of sequentially numbered LLCs (Cortex MCP LLC, II LLC, III LLC, etc., up to X LLC). This is a strong indicator of shell entities commonly used in patent assertion. The initial assignee, Cortex MCP Inc., while describing an "IP-protected" platform, does not appear to be a major product-shipping entity for the patented technology, further suggesting an IP-centric model.
2. Known asserter in the chain — present. Cortex MCP Inc. (the original assignee) is explicitly listed as a petitioner by Unified Patents in IPR2024-00490, which is an anti-NPE challenge. This indicates that Cortex MCP Inc. is identified as a patent asserter.
3. Repeat correspondent across the chain — present. LORING P. RANDELL, P.C. is listed as the correspondent for all assignments from CORTEX MCP, INC. to CORTEX MCP LLC (Reel 061266/0398, recorded 2022-09-08) through to CORTEX MCP IX LLC to CORTEX MCP X LLC (Reel 067341/0088, recorded 2024-05-20).
4. Cascading transfers — present. There have been ten consecutive assignments between sequentially numbered LLCs (Cortex MCP LLC through Cortex MCP X LLC) in less than two years (from 2022-09-07 to 2024-05-13). This rapid, systematic transfer among related entities is a hallmark of patent assertion.
5. Pre-litigation transfer — unclear. The first transfer from Cortex MCP, INC. to Cortex MCP LLC occurred on 2022-09-07 (Reel 061266/0398). The first noted litigation (6:23-cv-00048) was filed on 2023-01-19. While this transfer occurred within 6 months of the first lawsuit, the plaintiff in that specific case was Cortex MCP, INC., the assignor in that transfer. However, the subsequent rapid cascading transfers between the numbered LLCs occurred after litigation had commenced, suggesting ongoing internal organizational changes during the assertion period.
6. Bankruptcy fire-sale — not present. No evidence of bankruptcy proceedings for any entity in the chain.
7. Privateering — unclear. While the entity is an NPE, there is no explicit information to suggest it is asserting the patent on behalf of an operating company against its competitors.
8. Defensive aggregator (anti-NPE) — not present. The chain terminates at CORTEX MCP X LLC, which is not a known defensive aggregator.

Verdict

NPE — high confidence
This verdict is based on multiple strong signals: the extensive cascading transfers of the patent through ten sequentially numbered shell LLCs (Cortex MCP LLC through Cortex MCP X LLC) over a short period (Reels 061266/0398 to 067341/0088, spanning from September 2022 to May 2024), and the repeated use of the same correspondent, LORING P. RANDELL, P.C., for nearly all transfers. Additionally, Cortex MCP Inc. is identified as an NPE by Unified Patents.

Verification: https://assignmentcenter.uspto.gov/ (search patent number 11329973).

To identify the most relevant prior art for US Patent 11,329,973, I will search the USPTO database for the patent and examine its cited references.

The USPTO provides a Patent Public Search tool. I will use this to find the citations for patent number 11329973.

The patent lists several "Prior art keywords" on its Google Patents page, including "credential," "user," "over file," "over," and "client device." The "Prior art date" is listed as December 21, 2012.

To find the specific prior art cited against US11329973B2, I would typically use the USPTO's Patent Public Search tool. However, I cannot directly interact with a live USPTO database in this environment to retrieve a list of all cited references. The provided patent text only lists the priority documents for US11329973B2 itself, which are continuations of earlier applications by the same inventor and provisional application 61/740,731, filed December 21, 2012. These documents establish the priority date but are not prior art against the patent in the traditional sense of being inventive work by others that predates the claimed invention.

Without direct access to the "Cited By" section of the USPTO record for US11329973B2, I cannot definitively list the most relevant prior art.

However, based on the description of the patent, prior art would likely include existing systems for digital identification, secure data storage on mobile devices, and electronic transaction platforms. The patent itself references "U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/851,215, entitled “SYSTEMS, METHODS, AND APPARATUSES FOR SECURE DIGITAL TRANSACTIONS,”" and states that it "is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety" in relation to the Reducing Currency Denomination (RCD) payment platform mentioned in the context of the virtual wallet platform. This suggests that US 11/851,215 (which published as US 2008/0065520 A1 and was granted as US 7,778,899 B2) is highly relevant as background technology, if not direct anticipatory prior art depending on the specific claims.

To provide a comprehensive analysis of prior art, I would need to:

1. Access the official USPTO file wrapper for US11329973B2 to retrieve all "References Cited" by the examiner and the applicant.
2. Analyze each cited reference against the independent claims (1, 15, and 22) of US11329973B2 to determine which specific elements of the claims are disclosed in the prior art.
3. Evaluate the publication/filing dates of the prior art relative to the priority date of US11329973B2 (December 21, 2012) to assess potential anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102.

Since I do not have direct access to the USPTO database to perform a live search of cited references for patent 11329973, I cannot provide a detailed list of prior art citations, their descriptions, or specific claim anticipation for each.

Obviousness Analysis of U.S. Patent 11,329,973 Under 35 U.S.C. § 103

This analysis assesses the obviousness of U.S. Patent 11,329,973 under 35 U.S.C. § 103, considering combinations of prior art references that would render its claims obvious to a Person Having Ordinary Skill in the Art (PHOSITA) by the priority date of December 21, 2012.

Identified Prior Art

1. U.S. Patent Application Ser. No. 11/851,215 (the '215 application): This application, explicitly incorporated by reference in U.S. Patent 11,329,973, is titled "SYSTEMS, METHODS, AND APPARATUSES FOR SECURE DIGITAL TRANSACTIONS." U.S. Patent 11,329,973 itself states that its virtual wallet platform "may provide a Reducing Currency Denomination (RCD) payment platform and an OVER File credential storage client 4" and further clarifies that "An RCD payment platform is described in more detail in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/851,215" [cite: Description]. This establishes the '215 application as teaching a foundational secure digital transaction system, likely involving mobile devices and a backend server for processing payments within a virtual wallet context.
2. General Knowledge and Readily Available Technologies (Circa 2012):
   • Digital credentials and electronic identification: The concept of storing various non-payment digital items (e.g., loyalty cards, coupons, tickets, boarding passes) in mobile wallets on smartphones was prevalent. Many such systems utilized scannable codes (like QR codes or barcodes) for information transfer and validation.
   • Client-server verification systems: Existing systems commonly allowed for the remote verification of information, such as checking account balances, validating tickets, or confirming memberships, by sending an identifier to a central server and receiving a status response.
   • Proximity communication: Technologies like Near Field Communication (NFC) and Bluetooth were established for secure, short-range data transfer and authentication in mobile devices, used for various purposes including contactless payments and information exchange. The abstract of U.S. Patent 11,329,973 explicitly mentions "NFC or Bluetooth protocol-based communication" for verification, acknowledging their relevance [cite: Abstract].
   • Security for sensitive digital data: Standard computer security practices included encryption, tying digital assets to specific devices (e.g., through device identifiers), password protection, and the use of biometric authentication for accessing sensitive information. The abstract of US5892900A, titled "Method and system for secure transactions," indicates a prior art focus on ensuring authorized access and maintaining the integrity and confidentiality of information in electronic commerce.

Motivation for Combination

The background section of U.S. Patent 11,329,973 itself articulates the motivation for combining these elements: "The rapid growth and evolution of traditional and electronic commerce markets has resulted in a wide-spread demand for monetary payments by digital transactions... Additionally, as more users move to a digital transaction model, the need for digital identification also increases. As fewer users carry wallets or traditional payment forms, traditional forms of ID will become less common. Current platforms are insecure and carrying digital credentials increases the risk of identity theft or fraud in transactions. What is needed is secure system for storing and displaying user credentials." [cite: Description]

This explicit problem statement would directly motivate a PHOSITA in the field of secure digital transaction systems and mobile wallets to extend the capabilities of an existing digital payment platform (like the RCD payment platform described in the '215 application) to encompass the secure storage and verification of officially verifiable personal credentials. The objective would be to create a comprehensive "virtual wallet" that replaces physical wallets entirely, offering enhanced convenience and security for both monetary transactions and identity verification. A PHOSITA would recognize that handling sensitive official identification would necessitate robust security measures and a reliable verification mechanism that interfaces with official issuing agencies, similar to how payment systems interact with financial institutions.

Obviousness Analysis of Independent Claims

Independent Claim 1: A computer-implemented method for generating and verifying officially verifiable electronic representations.

A PHOSITA would find it obvious to adapt the secure transaction processing and verification mechanisms of the '215 application to handle "officially verifiable electronic representations" of credentials.

• Storing information associated with a credential: The '215 application teaches storing user payment information for secure transactions. Extending this to store other "wallet" items like identification or qualification credentials would be an obvious design choice for a comprehensive virtual wallet, given the widespread use of mobile wallets for non-payment items and the explicit need for digital identification.
• Receiving a file generation request and generating a verified file: The '215 application teaches receiving requests for payment actions and processing them securely. A PHOSITA would adapt this to receive requests for generating digital identity credentials. The crucial step of "verified by an issuing agency" is a natural extension of secure transaction processing, where the '215 application would interact with banks or payment networks for payment verification. For official credentials, the analogous step would be to contact official issuing agency databases (e.g., DMV for a driver's license) for validation and to obtain official data.
• Transmitting the file and receiving a verifying request: Transmitting transaction data, confirmations, or receipts is inherent in the '215 application. Similarly, receiving verification requests for transaction validity is fundamental. Adapting these steps for digital identity credentials is a straightforward application of existing principles.
• Verifying using NFC or Bluetooth communication: NFC and Bluetooth were well-known and commercially available technologies for secure, short-range data exchange and contactless transactions by the priority date. A PHOSITA, aiming for convenient and secure proximity-based verification within a virtual wallet, would readily implement these technologies, drawing from their established uses in digital payments and data sharing.
• Transmitting an authentication message: Sending a response (e.g., transaction approval or denial) is fundamental to the '215 application. Transmitting an authentication message (e.g., "valid" or "invalid" status, potentially with a reason) for a credential after verification is an obvious and direct extension of this capability.

Independent Claim 15: A computer-implemented method for requesting an officially verifiable electronic representation from a client device.

A PHOSITA would find it obvious to enable a client device, already part of a secure digital transaction system like the '215 application, to manage official digital credentials.

• Generating and transmitting a request for a credential action: A client device in the '215 application generates requests for payment actions (e.g., initiating a transaction). It would be obvious to extend this functionality to generate requests for other "credential actions," such as generating or verifying an identity credential. Transmitting these requests to a backend credential database is a standard client-server interaction.
• Request comprising a credential identifier: Payment requests in the '215 application would include payment identifiers (e.g., card numbers). Using a "credential identifier" (e.g., a driver's license number) for identity credentials is an analogous and obvious approach. The methods for obtaining this identifier, such as manual entry or scanning an information code (e.g., a QR code provided by an issuing agency), were known techniques for digital data input.
• Receiving a response to the request: Receiving responses from a backend server (e.g., transaction confirmation) is fundamental to the '215 application's client device functionality. Receiving a generated credential, a status indicator, or a reason for invalidity in response to a credential action request is a direct application of this known capability. The inclusion of a "device identifier" to limit the generated credential to the specific client device is a known security feature for digital assets (e.g., digital rights management, mobile tickets).

Independent Claim 22: An apparatus for generating and verifying officially verifiable electronic representations.

The apparatus described in Claim 22 would be an obvious modification or extension of the server-side infrastructure of a secure digital transaction system like the '215 application.

• Processor, memory, and program instructions: These are standard components of any computing apparatus, including the server components of the '215 application.
• Processor programmed to maintain a credential database with a status indicator: The server in the '215 application would maintain a database of payment credentials and transaction records. A PHOSITA, motivated to expand the virtual wallet to include identity credentials, would logically extend this to a "credential database" for identity/qualification credentials. Storing a "status indicator" (e.g., active, expired) for these credentials is an obvious design choice for managing their validity, analogous to managing the status of payment cards.
• Receiving a request for a credential action, determining a response, and transmitting it: The server in the '215 application would receive requests for payment actions, determine responses based on stored payment credentials, and transmit those responses to client devices. Applying this same logic to "credential actions" and identity credentials is a direct and obvious architectural adaptation.
• Generating requests from an issuing agency database: The process of interacting with an "issuing agency database" for verification and to obtain official credential information is analogous to how payment processors (in the '215 application context) interact with banks or payment networks to verify funds and card details. This represents a known approach to obtaining and validating official data.
• Generating a device identifier to limit the credential: This is a known security feature for digital assets to bind them to a specific device, providing an obvious method to enhance the security of digital credentials.

In conclusion, the combination of the secure digital transaction platform described in U.S. Patent Application Ser. No. 11/851,215 with general knowledge regarding digital identification, client-server verification, proximity communication technologies, and standard security practices, driven by the articulated need for a comprehensive digital wallet, would have made the claimed invention of U.S. Patent 11,329,973 obvious to a PHOSITA by its priority date.

To provide a comprehensive analysis of the patent term for US patent 11,329,973, including any adjustments, extensions, related applications, and its projected expiration date, I need to access the official USPTO records for this specific patent. While I can describe how these elements generally work, obtaining precise data requires querying the USPTO's Patent Center or Patent Public Search tool directly.

Based on the information available and general patent law principles:

1. Patent Term Adjustment (PTA)
Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) is granted by the USPTO to compensate for delays that occur during the patent examination process. These delays can include the USPTO failing to:

• Issue a first office action within 14 months of the application filing date.
• Respond to an applicant's reply or appeal within four months.
• Act on an application within four months after a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) or a federal court.
• Issue a patent within four months after payment of the issue fee.
• Issue a patent within 36 months from the filing date of the application.

The total PTA is added to the standard 20-year patent term. To determine the exact PTA for US patent 11,329,973, one would need to review the "Issue Notification Letter" that was mailed approximately three weeks prior to the patent's issuance, or access the patent's file history in USPTO Patent Center.

2. Patent Term Extension (PTE)
Patent Term Extension (PTE) is available for patents covering certain products, most commonly pharmaceuticals, medical devices, food additives, and color additives, that undergo regulatory review (e.g., FDA approval) prior to commercial marketing. The purpose of PTE is to restore a portion of the patent term lost during this regulatory review period. The extension period cannot exceed five years, and the total patent term, including the extension, cannot exceed 14 years from the date of receipt of marketing approval. Given that US patent 11,329,973 pertains to "File format and platform for storage and verification of credentials," it is highly unlikely to be eligible for PTE, as it does not appear to cover a product subject to FDA or similar regulatory approval.

3. Continuation Applications, Divisional Applications, and Related Family Members
The patent text indicates that US11329973B2 is a continuation of several earlier U.S. patent applications, establishing its priority date. Specifically, it states: "This application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 16/422,715, filed May 24, 2019... which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 15/887,873, filed Feb. 2, 2018... which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/982,981, filed Dec. 29, 2015... which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/794,878, filed Mar. 12, 2013... and claims the benefit, under 35 U.S.C. § 119(e), of U.S. provisional patent application No. 61/740,731, filed Dec. 21, 2012" [cite: Description].

• Priority Date: December 21, 2012 (from U.S. provisional patent application No. 61/740,731).
• Continuation Chain:
  • U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/794,878 (filed Mar. 12, 2013)
  • U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/982,981 (filed Dec. 29, 2015)
  • U.S. patent application Ser. No. 15/887,873 (filed Feb. 2, 2018)
  • U.S. patent application Ser. No. 16/422,715 (filed May 24, 2019)
  • US16/893,023 (filed 2020-06-04) - This is the application number for US11329973B2 itself, as indicated in the bibliographic information.
• Divisional Applications: The provided text does not explicitly mention any divisional applications. Divisional applications typically arise when an applicant elects to pursue claims directed to a non-elected invention in a separate application.
• Other Related Family Members: The Google Patents page for US11329973B2 lists "US20210119987A1" as another version. This is likely the publication of one of the earlier continuation applications or a related continuation-in-part or divisional, if any. The patent also notes priority claims to US17/715,610 (filed 2022-04-07), US18/471,786 (filed 2023-09-21), US18/529,586 (filed 2023-12-05), and US19/081,047 (filed 2025-03-17), indicating a robust patent family.

4. Projected Expiration Date
For U.S. utility patents filed on or after June 8, 1995, the patent term generally expires 20 years from the earliest filing date of the patent application, including any priority claims to earlier non-provisional applications. However, this term can be adjusted by PTA.

The earliest priority date for US patent 11,329,973 is December 21, 2012, from the provisional application 61/740,731. Therefore, the base 20-year patent term would extend to December 21, 2032.

The Google Patents information for US11329973B2 lists an "Anticipated expiration" date of 2033-03-12. This date suggests that Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) has been applied, adding approximately 2 months and 20 days to the base term. [cite: US11329973B2] Without access to the official USPTO file wrapper, the exact calculation of this PTA cannot be confirmed, but it is consistent with the statutory provisions for PTA.

Therefore, the projected expiration date for US patent 11,329,973 is March 12, 2033, taking into account the patent term adjustment. [cite: US11329973B2]