DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This office action is in response to applicant's communication of October 3, 2025. The rejections are stated below. Claims 1-11,13-14,16-18 and 21-26 are pending and have been examined.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
2. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 10/3/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment/Arguments
3. Applicant’s arguments/amendment concerning 35 U.S.C. 101 have been considered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
4. Claims 1-11,13-14,16-18 and 21-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea of adjusting a device based on data gathering and analysis without significantly more.
Claims 1-11,13-14,16-18 and 21-26 are directed to an apparatus, method, and a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium system which are one of the four statutory categories of invention (Step 1: YES).
5. Claim 9 recites “a method , comprising:
detecting, by a …, the … portion movable from a first position to a plurality of second positions, at …, and … and based on a …, the … in proximity to the …;
retrieving, by the at … and based on the detected … and from a … of the …, stored position data for the movable display portion of the …;
receiving, by the …, … data related to the vehicle in proximity to the …, wherein the …data includes a distance between a …;
analyzing, by the at …, the … data to identify a second position for the movable display portion based on the …;
comparing, by the at …, the stored position data to the identified second position to determine whether the data corresponds to the …;
determining, by the at …, that the stored position data does not correspond to the …;
transmitting, by the at … and to …, a request for authentication data;
responsive to receiving authentication data from the …:
based on the identified second position, adjusting, based …, the … from the first position to the identified second position;
receiving, by the …, user selection of an adjustment button on the … to further adjust the … from the identified second position to a third position; and
based on the received user selection, further adjusting, by the …, the … to the third position”.
6. These limitations describe an abstract idea of adjusting a device based on data gathering and corresponds to Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity (fundamental economic practices, automation to improve service efficiency). Accordingly, claim 9 recites an abstract idea (Step 2A: Prong 1: YES).
7. The claim also recites as additional elements such as “drive-up self-service kiosk having a movable display portion, at least one processor, memory, radio frequency identification within a vehicle, database of the drive-up self-service kiosk, sensor, user computing device” which do no more than implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment. Therefore, claim 9 recites an abstract idea without a practical application (Step 2A - Prong 2: NO).
8. Further, as the additional elements of claim 9 do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, they do not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field. Thus, claim 9 is not patent eligible (Step 2B: NO).
9. Claims 1 and 17 also recite the abstract idea of idea of adjusting a device based on data gathering and corresponds to Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity (fundamental economic practices, automation to improve service efficiency) step one of step 2A (MPEP 2106.04). Claim 1 includes the additional elements of “drive-up self-service kiosk, comprising a movable display portion, at least one processor, communication interface communicatively coupled to the at least one processor, memory storing computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the drive-up self-service kiosk”. Claim 17 includes the additional elements of “ one or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing instructions that, when executed by a drive-up self-service kiosk comprising a movable display …, at least one processor, memory, and a communication interface, cause the drive-up self-service kiosk. The additional elements do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. Therefore, as they do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, they do not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
10. Claims 2, 10, and 18 each recite “wherein the received sensor data further includes at least one dimension of the vehicle” which further define the abstract idea. The claim includes “sensor and vehicle” as additional elements. The additional elements do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. And, as they do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, they do not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
11. Claims 3 and 11 each recites “wherein the at least one dimension of the … is captured …” which further define the abstract idea. The claim includes “vehicle is captured using light detection and ranging” as additional elements. The additional elements do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. And, as they do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, they do not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
12. Claim 4 recites “wherein the first position is a default position” which further describe the abstract idea which further describe the abstract idea.
13. Claims 5 and 13 each recite “receive a request to initiate a transaction; receive user input via the …; and process the requested transaction based on the user input received via the …” which further describe the abstract idea. The claim includes “movable display portion” as an additional element. The additional element does not more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. And, as it does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, it does not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
14. Claims 6, 14, and 21 each recite “detect completion of the requested transaction; and responsive to detecting completion of the requested transaction, further adjust the … from the third position to the first position” which further describe the abstract idea. The claim includes “movable display portion” as an additional element. The additional element does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. And, as it does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, they do not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
15. Claims 7 and 22 each recite “wherein the movable display portion further includes at least one of: a deposit aperture, a card reader or a keypad that are adjustable with the movable display portion” as an additional elements. The additional elements do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. And, as they do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, they do not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
16. Claims 8 and 16 each recite “wherein adjusting the movable display portion from the first position to the identified second position causes the movable display portion to physically move relative to a remainder of the drive-up self-service kiosk” as an additional elements. The additional elements do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. And, as they do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, they do not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
17. Claim 22 recites “wherein the … does not include a ” which further describe the abstract idea. The claim includes “NFC-enabled ATM” and ”keypad” as additional elements. The additional elements do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. And, as they do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, they do not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
18. Claim 23 recites “wherein … from the first position to the identified second position includes moving the display portion in a horizontal direction and a vertical direction” which further describe the abstract idea. The claim includes “adjusting the movable display portion” as additional elements. The additional elements do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. And, as they do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, they do not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
19. Claim 24 recites “wherein detecting completion of the transaction includes detecting one of: a card being returned to a user or a receipt being printed” which further describe the abstract idea.
20. Claim 25 recites “further including in response to receiving … data related to a …e in proximity to the …, transmit, to the user computing device, a request for additional authentication data” which further describe the abstract idea. The claim includes “sensor, vehicle in proximity to the drive-up self-service kiosk, user computing device” as additional elements. The additional elements do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. And, as they do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, they do not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
21. Claim 26 recites “wherein the additional authentication data includes one of: a one-time passcode or biometric data” which further describe the abstract idea.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC §112
22. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
23. Claims 1-11,13-14,16-18 and 21-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Lack of Algorithm
24. Regarding claim 1, the claims recite multiple computer-implemented functions, such as "detect... the vehicle in proximity to the drive-up self-service kiosk", "analyze the sensor data to identify a second position for the movable display portion", and "compare the stored position data to the identified second position". The specification must disclose an algorithm for performing the claimed function. " The specification provides no algorithm, mathematical formula, flow chart, or prose description that explains how the "at least one processor" is programmed to perform these specific functions. A general-purpose computer, without disclosure of a specific algorithm, is insufficient structure (MPEP 2181 IV: MPEP 2161 01 I). Claim 9 is rejected on the same basis as it recites similar language. The method steps are performed by a generic processor, and the specification still fails to disclose how the processor is programmed to perform the steps of "detecting," "analyzing," and "comparing". Same as Claim 1. The method steps rely on the same vague, non-objective terms such as "proximity" and "corresponds," making the method's boundaries unclear. Claim 17 is rejected on the same basis as it recites similar language. The stored instructions, when executed, cause the kiosk to perform the same functions ("detect," "analyze," "compare"). The specification still fails to enable these functions by not disclosing the required algorithm. Same as Claim 1. The media claim inherits all the vague limitations of the method it implements, such as "proximity" and "corresponds."
25. Claims 2-8, 10-11,13-14,16, 18, and 21-26 are rejected as each depends on claims 1, 9, and 17.
26. 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.
27. Claims 1, 3-6, 8-11, 13-15, 17-20, and 22-24 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
28. Claims 1, 9, and 17 each recite “non-objective terms that fail to inform the public of the invention's boundaries. The phrase "proximity to the drive-up self-service kiosk" lacks any objective standard to determine its scope. With respect to "stored position data... [that] corresponds to the vehicle", the claim provides no criteria for determining when data "corresponds" to a vehicle. The phrase "authentication data" is a purely functional term with no structural or tangible limitation provided in the claim or adequately supported in the specification.
29. Claim 1 recites a "communication interface" and a "memory storing computer-readable instructions." While these terms do not use the word "means," they are generic placeholders that describe a function without reciting sufficient structure for performing that function . Under the principles of 35 U.S.C. 112(f), when a claim limitation is a non-structural term that is modified by functional language and not modified by sufficient structure, it must be construed to cover the corresponding structure in the specification and its equivalents . The specification, however, fails to disclose any corresponding structure for these elements, such as the specific hardware or software configurations that perform the claimed communication and instruction-storage functions. Therefore, the scope of these claim terms cannot be determined, rendering them indefinite.
30. Claim 17 is directed to a "non-transitory computer-readable media," which is an article of manufacture. The claim defines the media by the functional instructions stored thereon, which cause the kiosk to perform specific operations (e.g., "detect," "retrieve," "analyze"). These functional instructions are a "means" for performing the claimed functions and are construed under 35 U.S.C. 112(f). The specification fails to disclose the algorithms that constitute the corresponding structure for these computer-implemented functions. Consequently, the claim is indefinite.
31. Claims 2-8, 10-11,13-14,16, 18, and 21-26 are rejected as each depends on claims 1, 9, and 17.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN T POE whose telephone number is (571)272-9789. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30am through 6pm est. 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) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Calvin Hewitt can be reached on 571-272-6709. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/K.T.P/Examiner, Art Unit 3692 /KEVIN T POE/
/DANIEL S FELTEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3692