Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (claims 1-6) in the reply filed on 11/17/25 is acknowledged.
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.
Claim 6 is 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 6 recites: cause the verification device to match the newly read first information with the first information stored in the database when the information stored in the RFID tag cannot be read in the second reading specifying the newly read first information; and
cause the verification device to match the newly read first information stored in the database when the information stored in the RFID tag can be read in the second reading specifying the newly read first information.
The claim is indefinite because it is not clear what the newly read first information is matched with when the information stored in the RFID tag can be read in the second reading specifying the newly read first information. It is assumed that it is matched with the first information store in the database. Furthermore, it is not clear what conditions the claim is claiming. It appears that the verification device matches the newly read first information regardless if the second reading specifies or is unable to specify the newly read first information.
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.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Moore (US 2018/0075690) in view of Nagai (US 2011/0115608).
Claim 1. Moore discloses a management system for casino items equipped with RFID tags (chips with RFID tags; paragraphs 39, 48) , the management system comprising:
an RFID reading device configured to read part or all information stored in a RFID tag of a casino item that exists within a reading range (reader/antennas for reading information for RFID enable chips; paragraphs 32, 40-41); and
a control device configured to control the RFID reading device (484 in Fig. 4, paragraphs 61, 63-66),
wherein the control device is configured to cause the RFID reading device to repeatedly perform (repeat attempts to read the data of the chip, paragraph 110) a first reading to read first information that is a part of the information stored in the RFID tag (read various information or data from or about the RFID enable chip include identifier, currency, denomination, chip set identifier, casino identifier, site, company, casino site, etc., paragraphs 46-47).
Moore discloses the claimed invention as discussed above but fails to teach that when new first information is read in the first reading, the control device is configured to cause the RFID reading device to perform a second reading to read all the information stored in the RFID tag. However, such modification would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art. In an analogous art to RFID tags, Nagai discloses a system of communicating with RFID tags. Nagai discloses that system communicates with a plurality of RFID tags (paragraph 47). Nagai discloses that during a first reading of the RFID tag in which a portion of the information is read (paragraphs 16-17, 69, 73). A second reading of the tag is performed to read the entire identification (paragraphs 16-17, 69, 73). Nagai discloses the communication device/reader and specify which tag to read by transmitting sending a command signal to the tag. This reduces the time to read all the IDs of the RFID tags (paragraphs 69, 73). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Moore’s invention and cause the RFID reading device to perform a second reading to read all the information stored in the RFID tag after the new first information is read in order to provide the predictable result of reducing the time to read all the information in the RFID tags.
Claim 2. Moore in view of Nagai discloses the management system according to claim 1, wherein the control device is configured to cause the RFID reading device to perform the second reading of the casino items for which the first information is newly read in the first reading (Nagai discloses the a first information is newly read in the first reading in which a command is sent for a second reading; paragraphs 16-17, 69, 73).
Claim 3. Moore in view of Nagai discloses the management system according to claim 1, wherein the control device is configured to determine whether to cause the RFID reading device to perform the second reading for all the casino items or only for the casino items for which the first information is newly read, based on number of the first information read in the first reading and number of the first newly read (Nagai discloses the communication device/reader specifies which tag to read by transmitting sending a command signal to the tag; paragraphs 69, 73. Therefore the second reading is based on the on number of the first information read in the first reading and number of the first newly read in order to identify the command for the second reading.).
Claim 4. Moore in view of Nagai discloses the management system according to claim 2, wherein the control device is configured to specify the newly read first information and read all the information of the casino item in the second reading of the casino item for which the first information has been newly read in the first reading (Nagai discloses the a first information is newly read in the first reading in which a command is sent for a second reading; paragraphs 16-17, 69, 73).
Claim 5. Claim 4. Moore discloses the management system according to claim 4, wherein the control device is configured to repeatedly perform the second reading specifying the newly read first information when the information stored in the RFID tag cannot be read in the second reading specifying the newly read item first (Moore discloses that the attempt to read the data from the chip is repeated if it is unable to read the data, paragraph 110.).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jasson H Yoo whose telephone number is (571)272-5563. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm.
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, Peter Vasat can be reached at 571 270-7625. 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.
/JASSON H YOO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715