IP Library › Granted Patent US 12,293,214
Granted Patent B2
US 12,293,214 · App. 17/859,102 · Granted May 6, 2025

Transaction exchange platform to determine secondary workflows for transaction object processing

Inventors: Nishant Srivastava (Glen Allen, VA); Joshua Condon (Maidens, VA); Eric K. Barnum (Midlothian, VA)
Assignee: Capital One Services, LLC
G06F9/466G06F9/3005G06F9/3555G06F9/44505
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 12,293,214
App. No.
17/859,102
Granted
May 6, 2025
Kind
B2
Abstract

Aspects described herein may relate to a transaction exchange platform using a streaming data platform (SDP) and microservices to process transactions in accordance with corresponding workflows. The transaction exchange platform may receive transactions from origination sources, which may be added to the SDP as transaction objects. Microservices on the transaction exchange platform may interact with the transaction objects based on configured workflows associated with the transactions. Further, the microservices may leverage machine-learning models to determine whether transaction objects may be more effectively processed using alternative or secondary workflows. Processing on the transaction exchange platform may facilitate clearing and settlement of transactions. Some aspects may provide for dynamic and flexible reconfiguration of workflows.

Claims (66)

1. A computer-implemented method comprising:

determining, by a streaming data platform, that processing of a transaction object according to a first workflow, corresponding to a transaction type of the transaction object, did not complete successfully;

determining, by a classification microservice and based on transaction details associated with the transaction object, whether the transaction object comprises information that would allow the transaction object to be processed via a second workflow, wherein the second workflow corresponds to an alternative transaction type and comprises a plurality of processing steps to process a transaction different from a plurality of processing steps associated with the first workflow;

sending, based on a determination that the transaction object can be processed via the second workflow, a request for approval to process the transaction object via the second workflow;

adding, by the classification microservice and based on receiving approval to process the transaction object via the second workflow, the transaction object to the streaming data platform with an indication of the second workflow;

retrieving, by a first microservice, a plurality of transaction objects, wherein the plurality of transaction objects comprises the transaction object;

processing, by the first microservice and based on a determination that a current workflow stage of the transaction object matches a first workflow stage associated with first microservice, the transaction object;

determining that the current workflow stage of the transaction object indicates that the transaction object has completed processing corresponding to the second workflow; and

removing the transaction object from the streaming data platform and outputting the transaction object with an indication that the transaction object has completed the processing corresponding to the second workflow to a downstream system.

2. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the determining, by the classification microservice, whether the transaction object comprises information that would allow the transaction object to be processed via the second workflow further comprises:

determining, by the classification microservice, a first transaction cost associated with completing the transaction using the first workflow; and

determining, by the classification microservice and using one or more machine-learning models, a second transaction cost for processing the transaction object according to the second workflow, wherein the determination that the transaction object can be processed via the second workflow is further based on an indication that the second transaction cost represents a more cost-effective approach than the first transaction cost.

3. The computer-implemented method of claim 2 , wherein the first transaction cost and the second transaction cost comprise at least one of: payor transaction costs, payee transaction costs, or processing entity transaction costs.

4. The computer-implemented method of claim 2 , wherein the first transaction cost and the second transaction cost comprise late fees associated with untimely completion of the transaction processing.

5. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the determining, by the classification microservice, whether the transaction object comprises information that would allow the transaction object to be processed via the second workflow further comprises:

determining, by the classification microservice, based on transaction metadata associated with the transaction object, a first transaction speed associated with processing the transaction according to the first workflow; and

determining, by the classification microservice, based on one or more machine-learning models, a second transaction speed associated with processing the transaction according to the second workflow, wherein the determination that the transaction object can be processed via the second workflow is further based on the second transaction speed being faster than the first transaction speed.

6. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the determining, by the classification microservice, whether the transaction object comprises information that would allow the transaction object to be processed via the second workflow further comprises:

determining, by the classification microservice, a first security level associated with processing the transaction according to the first workflow; and

determining, by the classification microservice and based on one or more machine-learning models, a second security level associated with processing the transaction according to the second workflow, wherein the determination that the transaction object can be processed via the second workflow is further based on the second workflow being at least as secure as the first workflow.

7. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the determining, by the classification microservice, whether the transaction object comprises information that would allow the transaction object to be processed via the second workflow further comprises:

determining, by the classification microservice and based on transaction metadata, a first completion probability associated with processing the transaction according to the first workflow; and

determining, by the classification microservice and based on one or more machine-learning models analyzing the transaction metadata, a second completion probability associated with processing the transaction according to the second workflow, wherein the determination that the transaction object can be processed via the second workflow is further based on the second completion probability being greater than or equal to the first completion probability.

8. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the determining, by the classification microservice, whether the transaction object comprises information that would allow the transaction object to be processed via the second workflow further comprises:

determining, by the classification microservice and based on transaction metadata, a first scalability associated with processing the transaction according to the first workflow; and

determining, by the classification microservice and based on one or more machine-learning models analyzing the transaction metadata, a second scalability associated with processing the transaction according to the second workflow, wherein the determination that the transaction object can be processed via the second workflow is further based on the second scalability being greater than or equal to the first scalability.

9. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the determining, by the classification microservice, whether the transaction object comprises information that would allow the transaction object to be processed via the second workflow is further based on a determination that the second workflow is at least as efficient as the first workflow.

10. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the determining, by the classification microservice, whether the transaction object comprises information that would allow the transaction object to be processed via the second workflow is further based on the second workflow completing processing of the transaction before a transaction deadline of the transaction.

11. One or more non-transitory computer readable media comprising instructions that, when executed by at least one processor, cause a computing device to perform operations comprising:

determining that processing of a transaction object according to a first workflow, corresponding to a transaction type of the transaction object, did not complete successfully;

determining, by a classification microservice and based on transaction details associated with the transaction object, whether the transaction object comprises information that would allow the transaction object to be processed via a second workflow, wherein the second workflow corresponds to an alternative transaction type and comprises a plurality of processing steps to process a transaction different from a plurality of processing steps associated with the first workflow;

sending, based on a determination that the transaction object can be processed via the second workflow, a request for approval to process the transaction object via the second workflow;

adding, by the classification microservice and based on receiving approval to process the transaction object via the second workflow, the transaction object to a streaming data platform with an indication of the second workflow;

retrieving, by a first microservice, a plurality of transaction objects, wherein the plurality of transaction objects comprises the transaction object;

processing, by the first microservice and based on a determination that a current workflow stage of the transaction object matches a first workflow stage associated with first microservice, the transaction object;

determining that the current workflow stage of the transaction object indicates that the transaction object has completed processing corresponding to the second workflow; and

removing the transaction object from the streaming data platform and outputting the transaction object with an indication that the transaction object has completed the processing corresponding to the second workflow to a downstream system.

12. The one or more non-transitory computer readable media of claim 11 , wherein the determining, by the classification microservice, whether the transaction object comprises information that would allow the transaction object to be processed via the second workflow further comprises:

determining, by the classification microservice, a first transaction cost associated with completing the transaction using the first workflow; and

determining, by the classification microservice and using one or more machine-learning models, a second transaction cost for processing the transaction object according to the second workflow, wherein the determination that the transaction object can be processed via the second workflow is further based on an indication that the second transaction cost represents a more cost-effective approach than the first transaction cost.

13. The one or more non-transitory computer readable media of claim 12 , wherein the first transaction cost and the second transaction cost comprise at least one of: payor transaction costs, payee transaction costs, or processing entity transaction costs.

14. The one or more non-transitory computer readable media of claim 12 , wherein the first transaction cost and the second transaction cost comprise late fees associated with untimely completion of the transaction processing.

15. The one or more non-transitory computer readable media of claim 11 , wherein the determining, by the classification microservice, whether the transaction object comprises information that would allow the transaction object to be processed via the second workflow further comprises:

determining, by the classification microservice, based on transaction metadata associated with the transaction object, a first transaction speed associated with processing the transaction according to the first workflow; and

determining, by the classification microservice, based on one or more machine-learning models, a second transaction speed associated with processing the transaction according to the second workflow, wherein the determination that the transaction object can be processed via the second workflow is further based the second transaction speed being faster than the first transaction speed.

16. A transaction exchange platform comprising:

a streaming data platform;

a plurality of microservices comprising at least a classification microservice and a first microservice, wherein the classification microservice and the first microservice are automatically configured to watch for transactions on the streaming data platform in corresponding workflow stages based on a plurality of workflows corresponding to a plurality of transaction types;

at least one processor; and

memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the transaction exchange platform to:

determine, by the streaming data platform, that processing of a transaction object according to a first workflow, corresponding to a transaction type of the transaction object, did not complete successfully;

determine, by the classification microservice and based on transaction details associated with a transaction object, whether the transaction object comprises information that would allow the transaction object to be processed via a second workflow, wherein the second workflow corresponds to an alternative transaction type and comprises a plurality of processing steps to process a transaction different from a plurality of processing steps associated with the first workflow;

send, based on a determination that the transaction object can be processed via the second workflow, a request for approval to process the transaction object via the second workflow;

add, by the classification microservice and based on receiving approval to process the transaction object via the second workflow, the transaction object to the streaming data platform with an indication of the second workflow;

retrieve, by the first microservice, a plurality of transaction objects, wherein the plurality of transaction objects comprises the transaction object;

process, by the first microservice and based on a determination that a current workflow stage of the transaction object matches a first workflow stage associated with first microservice, the transaction object;

determine that the current workflow stage of the transaction object indicates that the transaction object has completed processing corresponding to the second workflow; and

remove the transaction object from the streaming data platform and output the transaction object with an indication that the transaction object has completed the processing corresponding to the second workflow to a downstream system.

17. The transaction exchange platform of claim 16 , wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the transaction exchange platform to:

determine a first transaction cost associated with completing the transaction using the first workflow; and

determine, using one or more machine-learning models, a second transaction cost for processing the transaction object according to the second workflow, wherein the determination that the transaction object can be processed via the second workflow is further based on an indication that the second transaction cost represents a more cost-effective approach than the first transaction cost.

18. The transaction exchange platform of claim 17 , wherein the first transaction cost and the second transaction cost comprise at least one of: payor transaction costs, payee transaction costs, or processing entity transaction costs.

19. The transaction exchange platform of claim 17 , wherein the first transaction cost and the second transaction cost comprise late fees associated with untimely completion of the transaction processing.

20. The transaction exchange platform of claim 16 , wherein the instructions to determine whether the transaction object comprises information that would allow the transaction object to be processed via the second workflow, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the transaction exchange platform to:

determine, based on transaction metadata associated with the transaction object, a first transaction speed associated with processing the transaction according to the first workflow; and

determine, based on one or more machine-learning models, a second transaction speed associated with processing the transaction according to the second workflow, wherein the determination that the transaction object can be processed via the second workflow is further based the second transaction speed being faster than the first transaction speed.

Assignments (1)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Jul 7, 2022
From: SRIVASTAVA, NISHANT; CONDON, JOSHUA; BARNUM, ERIC K.
To: CAPITAL ONE SERVICES, LLC
Reel/Frame 060427/0860 →
Continuity (1)
Related Publication 20240012676A1 · Jan 11, 2024
References Cited (57)
US 7110969B1 · Bennett et al. · 2006 [cited by applicant]
US 9754318B1 · Spies et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 10474977B2 · Stevens et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 10664810B2 · Capurro · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 10839022B1 · Klein et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 11023528B1 · Lee · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20060149611A1 · Diep et al. · 2006 [cited by applicant]
US 20070100961A1 · Moore · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 20070276714A1 · Beringer · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 20070288459A1 · Kashiyama et al. · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 20070288635A1 · Gu et al. · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 20080010198A1 · Eliscu · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20090313311A1 · Hoffmann et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20100138438A1 · Torikai et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20100232286A1 · Takahashi et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20110047054A1 · Ginter et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 20120030094A1 · Khalil · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 20130152041A1 · Hatfield et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 20140372394A1 · Frankel et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20150088756A1 · Makhotin et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20150379514A1 · Poole · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20160004751A1 · Lafuente Alvarez et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160035014A1 · Smith · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160124742A1 · Rangasamy et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160127254A1 · Kumar et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160307190A1 · Zarakas et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20170041189A1 · Aswathanarayana et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20180077038A1 · Leff et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180101848A1 · Castagna et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180307514A1 · Koutyrine et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180332138A1 · Liu et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20190043207A1 · Carranza et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190199626A1 · Thubert et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190392392A1 · Elden et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20200004604A1 · Lavoie et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200241944A1 · Derdak et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200257676A1 · Zhang et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200310830A1 · Morgan et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20210058424A1 · Chang et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210192534A1 · Lee · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20210264114A1 · Abreu · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210304208A1 · Noble et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210304322A1 · Thakur et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20220012707A1 · Gopalakrishnan Nair et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20220050897A1 · Gaddam · 2022 [cited by examiner]
US 20220214911A1 · Scarfutti et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20220337659A1 · Nomura et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20230262094A1 · Patnaikuni et al. · 2023 [cited by applicant]
CN 108052996A · 2018 [cited by applicant]
Rimma Nehme, Efficient Query Processing for Rich and Diverse Real-Time Data, Purdue University, Jun. 10, 2009 (Year: 2009). [cited by applicant]
Nov. 25, 2020—Final Rejection—U.S. Appl. No. 16/723,545. [cited by applicant]
Oct. 16, 2020—Final Rejection—U.S. Appl. No. 16/723,509. [cited by applicant]
Feb. 1, 2021—Notice of Allowance—U.S. Appl. No. 16/723,439. [cited by applicant]
Rathnayake, A Realtime Monitoring Platform forWorkflow Subroutines, 2018 IEEE (Year: 2018). [cited by applicant]
Feb. 12, 2021—Notice of Allowance—U.S. Appl. No. 16/723,509. [cited by applicant]
Apr. 1, 2021—International Search Report and Written Opinion—PCT/US2020/065979. [cited by applicant]
Oct. 25, 2023—(WO) International Search Report and Written Opinion—App No. PCT/US2023/027087. [cited by applicant]