Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/031,059

METHOD FOR PROCESSING VALUE DOCUMENTS, AND VALUE DOCUMENT PROCESSING SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Apr 10, 2023
Examiner
SHAPIRO, JEFFREY ALAN
Art Unit
3619
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Giesecke+Devrient Currency Technology GmbH
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
55%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 9m
To Grant
70%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 55% of resolved cases
55%
Career Allow Rate
483 granted / 881 resolved
+2.8% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+15.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 9m
Avg Prosecution
47 currently pending
Career history
928
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.5%
-36.5% vs TC avg
§103
52.5%
+12.5% vs TC avg
§102
19.7%
-20.3% vs TC avg
§112
20.3%
-19.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 881 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
DETAILED ACTION 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 . 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 12-21 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. Regarding Claim 12, lines 3 and 4 recite the phrase “using which the valuable documents” is unclear and indefinite. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 12-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Klein et al (US 2015/0146963 A1). Regarding Claim 12, Klein discloses a method for processing valuable documents, as illustrated in figures 8a and 8b, for example, in particular banknotes, as mentioned at paragraphs 105 mentioning currency bills and substitute currency notes, paragraph 106, mentioning substitute currency media and paragraph 107, mentioning currency bills, substitute currency media, and as mentioned at paragraphs 115-122, including the following steps: ascertaining first identification data, i.e., serial numbers as mentioned in paragraphs 151 and 372, and as illustrated in figures 8a and 8b, steps (802) and (812), in particular serial numbers, as mentioned at paragraphs and as illustrated in figures 3a-3e, 8a and 8b, in particular step (812), using which the valuable documents, i.e., as mentioned at paragraphs 115-122, contained in a plurality of different batches are identifiable, i.e., via image scanner (140a, 140b) as illustrated in figure 1 and as mentioned at paragraph 128, in at least one valuable document processing device (101, 101a, 101b), as illustrated in figures 1, 4a and 4b generating assignment data, i.e., interpreted as a transaction identifier number as mentioned in paragraph 141 and/or a header/trailer serial number which is equivalent to a batch number or subbatch number as mentioned at paragraphs 141, 142, 212 (noting the batch number data field (387) and subbatch number data field (388)) and noting batrch number (1263c) and subbatch number (1264c) as illustrated at figure 12c and as mentioned at paragraph 515, using which the first identification data, i.e., serial numbers as mentioned in paragraphs 151 and 372, and as illustrated in figures 8a and 8b, steps (802) and (812), of the valuable documents contained in the plurality of batches are assigned to the respective batch, transmitting the first identification data, i.e., as mentioned at paragraph 256 and as illustrated in figures 3e and figure 8a, step (806), “transmit customer data file to financial institution”, in particular via an Internet service, i.e., noting step (806) in figure 8a and noting the mention of “internet/online banks” in paragraph 111 and communications connected to a network/internet as mentioned at paragraphs 153, 353, 455, 546, 612 and 809, to an external computing device, i.e. financial institution/bank computer (450b) as mentioned in paragraph 252, and the financial institution system as mentioned at paragraph 373 for example, comparing the transmitted first identification data, i.e., banknote serial numbers as mentioned at paragraph 372, and as seen in figure 19b at steps (1904) “image currency bills” and (1906) “extract data” or various characteristics such as back plate number or magnetic or other various banknote characteristics used for banknote authentication, as mentioned at paragraph 152, for example, with predetermined second identification data, in particular serial numbers, i.e., serial numbers in a currency bill serial number database, as mentioned in figure 8a, step (812), such as a suspect serial number database, as mentioned in paragraph 373 and the blacklist database as mentioned in paragraph 198, for example, and which render identifiable valuable documents that should be withdrawn from circulation and/or should remain in circulation, in the external computing device (151, 450a, 450b), noting that a banknote with a serial number matching the blacklist database is understood to be a banknote that should be removed from circulation, and, if the comparison has shown that the valuable documents contain at least one valuable document that should be withdrawn from circulation, i.e., figure 8a, step (814) “does currency bill serial number match serial number database”, identifying the batch containing the at least one valuable document to be withdrawn from circulation from the plurality of batches using the assignment data, i.e, header/trailer field and.or header trailer serial numbers as mentioned at paragraph 693 and as illustrated in figure 20b, noting step (2022) asking “is extracted serial number a header/trailer serial number”, and a result of the comparison of the first identification data with the second identification data, i.e, the header/trailer serial number of the batch of bills being processed as well as the customer identifier, as mentioned at paragraph 702 and noting step (2036) in figure 20b, for example, and sorting the valuable documents contained in the identified batch in the at least one valuable document processing device (101, 101a, 101b) on the basis of the result of the comparison of the first identification data, i.e,. the extracted serial number as mentioned at step (2008) of figure 20a and step (2020) of figure 20b, with the second identification data, ie., the header/trailer serial number associated with the customer ID, as mentioned in step (2010) and the customer id as mentioned at step 2024), for example. See also paragraphs 707, 718 and 797, for example. Regarding Claim 13, Klein discloses wherein the result of the comparison of the first identification data with the second identification data contains first sorting data, i.e., interpreted as the result of the comparison of the first identification data with the second identification data, which is represented by step (2028), i.e, “is bill suspect”-yes or no, with the answer of yes causing transport of the suspect bill to the reject receptacle at step (2032) as well as an at step (3026) to “associate denomination of suspect bill with customer ID” in figure 20b, for example, which render identifiable valuable documents that should be withdrawn from circulation and/or should remain in circulation, as mentioned at steps (2028, 2032, 2034 and 2036) and the batch containing the at least one valuable document that should be withdrawn from circulation is identified using the assignment data and the first sorting data, and the valuable documents are sorted in the at least one valuable document processing device on the basis of the first sorting data, as mentioned at paragraphs 693, 701, 702, 707, 718 and 797, for example. Regarding Claim 14, Klein discloses including the following further steps: in each case recording one or more properties of the valuable documents in the at least one valuable document processing device by means of one or more sensors, as mentioned at paragraphs 163 (UV sensor, IR sensors, magnetic sensors, imaging sensors), 317 (fitness sensors) and 557 (several different sensors), and generating corresponding sensor data, transmitting the sensor data, in particular via an Internet service, i.e., noting the mention at paragraph 153 that “communications port 180 is configured to be communicatively connected to a network (e.g., Internet, private network, customer network, financial institution network, LAN, WAN, secured network, etc.) to permit information to be transmitted to and from the document processing device 101”, to the external computing device (151, 450a, 450b), noting step (806) “transmit customer data file to financial institution”, of figure 8a, step (1856), “make data file available” and step (1858) “transmit data file to financial institution” of figure 18g, for example, checking the valuable documents, in particular with regard to authenticity and/or condition, i.e., via document processor (101, 101a, 101b), using the sensor data in the external computing device, i.e. financial institution/bank computer (450b), for example, to the effect of whether one or more valuable documents should be withdrawn from circulation and/or should remain in circulation, i.e., such as at steps (810, 812, 814) of figure 8a or steps (822, 824, 826) of figure 8b, or steps (2020, 2022, 2026 and 2028) of figure 20b, for example, and, if the check of the valuable documents using the sensor data has shown that the valuable documents contain at least one valuable document that should be withdrawn from circulation, identifying the batch containing the at least one valuable document to be withdrawn from circulation from the plurality of batches using the assignment data and a result of the check of the valuable documents using the sensor data, as shown in steps (2032, 2034, 2036) of figure 20b, for example, and sorting the valuable documents contained in the identified batch in the at least one valuable document processing device on the basis of the result of the check, as mentioned at paragraphs 707, 718 and 797, for example. Regarding Claim 15, Klein discloses wherein the result of the check of the valuable documents using the sensor data, as mentioned at paragraphs 163 (UV sensor, IR sensors, magnetic sensors, imaging sensors), 317 (fitness sensors) and 557 (several different sensors) as well as paragraph 792, contains second sorting data, i.e., the result of whether or not the banknotes/documents are found in a blacklist of counterfeit documents, which render identifiable valuable documents that should be withdrawn from circulation and/or should remain in circulation, such as illustrated in figure 20b, steps 2028, 2032, 2034, 2036, 2038), the batch containing the at least one valuable document that should be withdrawn from circulation is identified using the assignment data and the second sorting data, and the valuable documents are sorted in the at least one valuable document processing device on the basis of the second sorting data, as mentioned at as mentioned at paragraphs 707, 718 and 797, for example. Regarding Claim 16, Klein discloses wherein the first identification data of the valuable documents are rerecorded when the valuable documents contained in the identified batch are sorted in the at least one valuable document processing device and the valuable documents contained in the identified batch are sorted using a comparison of the rerecorded first identification data with the first sorting data or second sorting data, as mentioned at paragraph 382 and noting figure 8b, steps (834) “transmit flagged customer record(s) to financial institution document processing system” and step (838) “process received documents in financial institution document processing system” can be construed as “rerecording” with respect to the prior recording as seen in figure 8a, step (802) “process documents at customer facility“. Regarding Claim 17, Klein discloses including the following further steps: in each case ascertaining one or more properties of the valuable documents in the at least one valuable document processing device (101, 101a, 101b) by means of one or more sensors, as mentioned at paragraphs 163 (UV sensor, IR sensors, magnetic sensors, imaging sensors), 317 (fitness sensors) and 557 (several different sensors) as well as paragraph 792, and generating corresponding sensor data, and selecting a portion of the first identification data using the sensor data, wherein the selected portion of the first identification data is transmitted to the external computing device, i.e. financial institution/bank computer (450b) as mentioned in paragraph 252, and the financial institution system as mentioned at paragraph 373 for example. Regarding Claim 18, Klein discloses wherein the ascertainment of the first identification data of the valuable documents and the sorting of the valuable documents contained in the identified batch are implemented in the same valuable document processing device (101, 1901) as illustrated in figures 19a and 19b and as mentioned at paragraphs 253 and 664-672, for example. See also figures 15-17, document processing devices (1510, 1610, 1770). Regarding Claim 19, Klein discloses wherein the ascertainment of the first identification data, i.e., represented by figure 5a, step (502), for example, of the valuable documents is implemented in a first valuable document processing device, i.e., any one of (101, 101a, 101b, 1171a, 1171b, 1171n, 1173a, 1173b, 1173n, 1410a, 1410b, 1410c, 1510, 1610, 1710, 2412, 2462) and the sorting of the valuable documents contained in the identified batch is implemented in a second valuable document processing device, i.e., any one of the remaining of (101, 101a, 101b, 1171a, 1171b, 1171n, 1173a, 1173b, 1173n, 1410a, 1410b, 1410c, 1510, 1610, 1710, 2412, 2462) that differs from the first valuable document processing device. Regarding Claim 20, Klein discloses wherein the predetermined second identification data are augmented with further second identification data which identify valuable documents whose check, in particular with regard to authenticity and/or condition, has shown that they should be withdrawn from circulation and/or should remain in circulation, i.e., noting the header/trailer serial number associated with the customer ID, as mentioned in step (2010) and the customer id as mentioned at step 2024), and noting the header card can include multiple types of transaction information such as “ the transaction information (e.g., transaction identifier number, batch number, subbatch number, bank account number, etc.) is obtained and/or extracted from a header card and/or a trailer card”, as mentioned at the first sentence of paragraph 142, for example. See also paragraphs 707, 718 and 797, for example. Regarding Claim 21, see the rejection of Claims 12-20, above. Regarding Claim 22, see the rejection of Claim 12, above. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Stieber ‘660 is cited as teaching multiple currency and cash handling devices wirelessly networked with one of the devices acting as a host device, as illustrated in figures 1-3 and noting cash handling unit (sorter) (12) with note counter (13) that passes the amount of the batch to the primary sorter (12). See also paragraph 19, last sentence and paragraph 20, for example. Banerjee ‘725 is cited as teaching both whitelist and blacklist usage as mentioned at col. 2, lines 4-17, col. 3, lines 32-47, col. 10, lines 50-53, col. 12, lines 11-22, col. 12, lines 23-37. Jones ‘876 is cited as teaching transfer of authentication data via memory of a mini-safe (SF1) as illustrated in figure 15, for example, for transfer between document processing devices (11a-11h, 100), for example. Asada ‘405 is cited as teaching secondary sorting data to sort valuable documents as mentioned at paragraph 5 and as Claims 2, 3, 7, 8, 10 and 14, for example. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEFFREY ALAN SHAPIRO whose telephone number is (571)272-6943. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday generally between 8:30AM and 6:30PM. 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, Anita Y Coupe can be reached at 571-270-3614. 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. /JEFFREY A SHAPIRO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619 February 21, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 10, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12583542
BICYCLE PARKING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12567298
A COIN FEEDING UNIT, A MODULE COMPRISING SAID COIN FEEDING UNIT, AND A COIN HANDLING MACHINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12562021
VEHICLE TREATMENT ARCH WITH PRESSURE DIFFERENTIAL INDICATION SYSTEM AND TOOL ENGAGEMENT SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12562017
A COIN APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12555478
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR REALTIME COMMUNITY INFORMATION EXCHANGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
55%
Grant Probability
70%
With Interview (+15.7%)
3y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 881 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