Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 16/962,478

Identification Badge System

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Jul 15, 2020
Examiner
GUDORF, LAURA A
Art Unit
2876
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Safepass Inc.
OA Round
4 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
4-5
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allow Rate
711 granted / 880 resolved
+12.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+11.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
17 currently pending
Career history
897
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.0%
-38.0% vs TC avg
§103
48.8%
+8.8% vs TC avg
§102
23.5%
-16.5% vs TC avg
§112
14.9%
-25.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 880 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
DETAILED ACTION Summary This Office Action is responsive to amendments filed 07/08/2025. Claim 1 has been amended. Claims 1-19 are currently pending. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-19 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Claim Objections Claims 1 and 13 are objected to because of the following informalities: In claim 1, line 16, please amend “relates to the use of the reusable badge” to recite “relates to a use of the reusable badge”; In claim 1, line 30, please amend “RFID tag” to recite “radio frequency identification (RFID) tag”; In claim 13, line 2, please amend “a QR reader” to recite “a Quick Response (QR) code reader”; Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 1 recites “a readiness indicator; and/or” in line 6. It is unclear to the examiner which limitations following “and/or” are required by the claim. Specifically, the recitation of “or” seems to imply that the claimed system could comprise “a image relaying device…, base station…, and readiness indictor” or “a reusage badge, housing, etc…”. For purposes of examination, claim 1 has been interpreted as if all limitations following “a readiness indicator; and/or” were not recited until further clarification is provided. Claim 1 further recites “the e-paper display adapted to maintain the electronic image received from the image relaying device when the reusable badge is removed from the at least one docking receptacle of the base station without the need for a power supply in the reusable badge” in line 23. The limitation “without the need for a power supply in the reusable badge” contradicts several other limitations recited in the claim. For example, line 4 recites “a base station or power cable for charging the badge(s)”, line 18 recites “for charging the badges”, and line 30 specifically recites “wherein the reusable badge further comprises a power supply”. Claim 1 recites the limitation "the badge(s)" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. While line 1 recites “a temporary/visitor identification badge system”, there is no recitation of “badge(s)” themselves. Additionally, claim 1 has recitation of both “badge(s)” and a “reusable badge”. It is unclear whether “the badges” and “the reusable badge” are referring to the same badge. For purposes of examination, each recitation of “badge” and “badges” has been interpreted as “reusable badge” or “reusable badges”. Claim 9 recites “wherein the power supply is a capacitor for holding a charge sufficient to erase the electronic image from the e-paper display” in lines 1-2. As noted above with respect to claim 1, the limitation “without the need for a power supply in the reusable badge” is in direct contradiction with the badge having a power supply. Claim 10 recite “wherein the power supply is a capacitor for holding a charge sufficient to overwrite the electronic image from the e-paper display” in lines 1-2. As noted above with respect to claim 1, the limitation “without the need for a power supply in the reusable badge” is in direct contradiction with the badge having a power supply. Claim 11 recites the limitation “wherein the power supply is a battery” in lines 1-2. As noted above with respect to claim 1, the limitation “without the need for a power supply in the reusable badge” is in direct contradiction with the badge having a power supply. Claim 18 recites the limitation “wherein the buzzer or vibration device is provided on the base station” in lines 1-2. However, the examiner notes that claim 1 recites the buzzer or vibration device as something the reusable badge has. It is unclear to the examiner how the buzzer or vibration device of the reusable badge is also “provided on the base station”. Further clarification is requested. Claims 2-8, 12-17, and 19 are rejected by dependence from claim 1. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PARK, US 2016/0093246 in view of RAO, US 2017/0315767. Re claim 1: PARK teaches a temporary/visitor identification badge system, comprising: an image relaying device (device management apparatus 200) for communicating an electronic image of a person or a person’s name, record ID number or other identifying mark or information [0039]-[0041] [0052] [Figures 2 and 22]; a base station (cradle 300) for supplying power to reusable badges (100) and communicating with the image relaying device, the base station having at least one docking receptable (i.e., a digital display device may be an identification badge [0042] [0055] [0056] [Figures 2 and 22]). PARK does not teach a readiness indicator. RAO teaches a reusable display system, comprising an image relaying device for communicating an electronic image; a base station for charging reusable displays and communicating with the image relaying device, the base station having at least one docking receptable (i.e., content source 101 is configured to both charge and relay image information to display modules 21 when the display modules are docked in a docking receptacle of the content source [Figures 14-15]); and a readiness indicator (i.e., one or more LEDs 114 [0142]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further incorporate the teachings of RAO in the system of PARK such that the system further includes a readiness indicator for the purpose of conveying output to a user indicating whether the docking station is powered on and ready for use or a status of coupling between a badge and the docking station (RAO [0142]). Examiner Notes on Potential Allowability Claim 1 and its dependents would potentially be allowable if the issues identified in the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection are addressed. The examiner suggests the following amendments to advance prosecution: 1) amend each recitation of “and/or” to recite “and”; and, 2) remove recitation of “without the need for a power supply in the reusable badge”. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: GILA et al, US 2012/0206341, teaches a passive, battery-less, reusable temporary/visitor badge having a housing, a colored or black and white e-paper display, and RFID [0023] [0054]-[0060] [Figures 1A-2A, 4A, and 4B]. PARKINSON, US 2008/0296367, a reusable badge having a housing, an e-paper display, a Wi-Fi transponder for communication and data transponder [0037], and power source [Figures 1-2]; wherein the e-paper display is adapted to maintain an electronic image received from an external source. SHINTO, US 9,721,405, teaches a smart ID badge system comprising: an image relaying device (entry terminal device) for communicating an electronic image of a person or a person’s name, record ID number or other identifying mark or information (column 3, lines 47-67, column 4, lines 1-27); a reusable badge having a e-paper display (110), antenna for communication and data transfer with the badge, and internal electrical components comprising components that automatically erase information, software, or firmware that relates to a use of the reusable badge (column 2, lines 59-67, column 3, lines 1-46; Figures 1-3). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAURA A GUDORF whose telephone number is (571)270-7607. If the Examiner cannot be reached by telephone, she can be reached through the following e-mail address: laura.gudorf@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 6:00-4:00 PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Michael Lee, can be reached at telephone number (571)272-2398. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form. /LAURA A GUDORF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 15, 2020
Application Filed
Aug 25, 2021
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 13, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Jul 27, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 15, 2023
Response Filed
Jan 09, 2024
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Jul 10, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Jul 19, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 08, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
May 07, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 08, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 19, 2025
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Nov 19, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 19, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12585900
PROCESS MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, METHOD AND INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578559
CAMERA LENS, CAMERA MODULE, AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12566934
2D BAR CODE USING ACTIVE OVERLAYS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12561539
FIXED RETAIL SCANNER WITH ON-BOARD ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (AI) ACCELERATOR MODULE AND RELATED METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12548033
SYSTEM AND METHODS TO PREVENT UNAUTHORIZED USAGE OF CARD READERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

4-5
Expected OA Rounds
81%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+11.2%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 880 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month