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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 March 9, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-3 and 5-20 remain pending, but stand rejected for the reasons detailed below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-3 and 5-20 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.
Applicant’s amendments clarify a switch triggers the video file to automatically play upon opening the device without further user input. Examiner cites to Clegg (US Publication No. 2011/0311196), which teaches wherein a video controller (Figure 1 and Paragraphs [0033], [0073]-[0074], microchip 20) automatically plays the entire video content on the video monitor (video screen 113) of the video file (Paragraphs [0074]-[0075], video file stored in memory of 20) and plays the audio content on the speaker (speaker 16; see Paragraphs [0003], [0006], [0012], [0039]) when the switch (switch 12a; see also Paragraph [0055]) is activated without any further user input (see Paragraphs [0004], [0073]-[0076], [0079]-[0081], [0083]).
Examiner also notes Carter teaches wherein the video controller (704, 706, 752) automatically plays the entire video content on the video monitor (38, 736) and plays the audio content on the speaker (46, 746) when the switch (34) is activated without further user input (see col. 6, ln. 1-25).
Examiner also submits US Publication Nos. 20240109361 20130015079 20110247963 20110232141 also teach the recited function of the video controller and switch.
For these reasons, and the reasons detailed below, claims 1-3 and 5-20 stand rejected.
Claim Objections
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 20, line 4, “a multi-media insert” should read --the multi-media insert--, considering “a multi-media insert” was previously introduced in claim 1, upon which claim 20 is dependent.
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 1-3 and 5-20 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 claims “the switch comprising a button-type switch, optical switch, magnetic switch, pressure switch, light sensor, motion sensor, and hinge sensor.” However, it is unclear how a single switch can include a plurality of different types of switches. For the purposes of examination, the limitation will be interpreted as “the switch comprising a button-type switch, an optical switch, a magnetic switch, a pressure switch, a light sensor, a motion sensor, or a hinge sensor.”
Claims 2-3 and 5-20 are rejected due to their dependency.
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 1-3, 5, 13, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gerstner (US Publication No. 2020/0375825) in view of Clegg (US Publication No. 2011/0311196).
Regarding claim 1 (as best understood), Gerstner discloses a multi-media insert (see Figures 120-130, instructional device 2758, including bezel 2764) comprising: a video monitor (Paragraph [0366], display of instructional device 2758; see display 4016 of computing device 4016); a speaker (Paragraph [0366], speaker of 2758); a switch (Figure 123 and Paragraph [0371], magnetic switch of 2758 engaged with magnetic post 2788), the switch comprising a button-type switch, optical switch, magnetic switch (see Paragraph [0371]), pressure switch, light sensor, motion sensor, or hinge sensor; a video controller having video file storage memory (Paragraph [0366], processor and programable memory of 2758; see processor 4002 and storage device 4006 in Figure 130); and a video file (Paragraph [0397], computer program capable of executing steps disclosed in Paragraphs [0081]-[0364] and Figures 2-119) including video content and audio content having condition specific information for a specific condition stored in the video file storage memory (see Paragraphs [0084]-[0085]), wherein the video controller (processor and memory of 2758) is in communication with the video monitor (display of 2758), the speaker (speaker of 2758), and the switch (2788), and wherein the video controller (processor and memory of 2758) plays the entire video content on the video monitor (display of 2758) of the video file and plays the audio content on the speaker (speaker of 2758) when the switch (magnetic switch engaged with 2788) is activated without any further user input (Paragraphs [0084]-[0087], [0371], magnetic switch engaged with magnetic post 2788 turning on device 2758 and allowing processor of 2758 to execute instructions stored on memory of 2758 that play audio and video instructions to a user; see also Figure 130).
Gerstner does not explicitly disclose wherein the video controller automatically plays the entire video content on the video monitor of the video file and plays the audio content on the speaker when the switch is activated without any further user input.
However, Clegg teaches wherein a video controller (Figure 1 and Paragraphs [0033], [0073]-[0074], microchip 20) automatically plays the entire video content on the video monitor (video screen 113) of the video file (Paragraphs [0074]-[0075], video file stored in memory of 20) and plays the audio content on the speaker (speaker 16; see Paragraphs [0003], [0006], [0012], [0039]) when the switch (switch 12a; see also Paragraph [0055]) is activated without any further user input (see Paragraphs [0004], [0073]-[0076], [0079]-[0081], [0083]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective file date of the claimed invention to have modified the video controller in Gerstner to automatically play a video file upon opening the device, as taught in Clegg, according to known methods to yield the predictable results of playing a video to communicate a message to a user. Doing so would have also allowed the video content to automatically start playing a pre-recorded message to communicate information to a user (see Paragraphs [0004], [0073]-[0076], [0079]-[0081], [0083] in Clegg).
Regarding claim 2, Gerstner in view of Clegg teaches the multi-media insert according to claim 1, further comprising (in Gerstner) a cover (base 2754 of case 2752) substantially covering the video monitor (display of 2758), wherein the cover (2754) is in communication with the switch (base 2754 including magnetic post 2788, where 2788 wakes up display of 2758 when case 2752 is opened) and activates the switch (magnetic switch of 2758) when the cover (2754) is moved away from the video monitor (display of 2758).
Regarding claim 3, Gerstner in view of Clegg teaches the multi-media insert according to claim 2, and further teaches (in Gerstner) wherein the cover (2754) is connected to the multi-media insert by a hinge (see claim 1 and Figures 120-121), wherein the cover (2754) substantially covers the video monitor (display of 2758) in a closed position (see Figure 120) and provides visual access to the video monitor (display of 2758) when the cover is in the open position (see Figure 121), and wherein the cover (2754) activates the switch (magnetic switch of 2758; through engagement with magnetic post 2788 of base 2754) when the cover (2754) is moved towards the open position (see Figure 121 and Paragraph [0371]).
Regarding claim 5, Gerstner in view of Clegg teaches the multi-media insert according to claim 1, and further teaches (in Gerstner) wherein the video monitor (display of 2758) is a touchscreen video monitor (see Paragraph [0366]).
Regarding claim 13, Gerstner in view of Clegg teaches the multi-media insert according to claim 1, and further teaches (in Gerstner) wherein the condition is opioid overdose treatment (see Paragraph [0093]).
Regarding claim 17, Gerstner in view of Clegg teaches the multi-media insert according to claim 1, and further teaches (in Gerstner) wherein the multi-media insert is sized to fit in a lid (lid 2756) of a container (case 2752).
Regarding claim 18, Gerstner in view of Clegg teaches the multi-media insert according to claim 1, further comprising (in Gerstner) a power supply (Paragraph [0366], battery of 2758) connected to the video controller (processor and memory of 2758) and provides electrical power to the multi-media insert to run the video controller (processor and memory of 2758), video monitor (display of 2758), and speaker (speaker of 2758).
Regarding claim 19, Gerstner in view of Clegg teaches the multi-media insert according to claim 18, and further teaches (in Gerstner) wherein the power supply (battery of 2758) is a rechargeable battery (see Paragraph [0370]).
Regarding claim 20, Gerstner in view of Clegg teaches a treatment kit comprising: a container (case 2752) having a lid (lid 2756); treatment materials (see Figure 123 and Paragraph [0371]) housed inside the container (2752); and the multi-media insert (instructional device 2758) as defined in claim 1 positioned on the lid (2756) and within the container (2752).
Claims 1, 6-7, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carter (US Patent No. 9286440) in view of Gerstner (US Publication No. 2020/0375825) and Clegg (US Publication No. 2011/0311196).
Regarding claim 1, Carter discloses a multi-media insert (console 28) comprising: a video monitor (video display 38); a speaker (speaker 46); a switch (on/off button), the switch (on/off button) comprising a button-type switch (on/off button), optical switch, magnetic switch, pressure switch, light sensor, motion sensor, and hinge sensor; a video controller (comprised of processors 704, 706 and memory card 752) having file storage memory (752); and a file (files stored on 752) including audio content having condition specific information for a specific condition stored in the file storage memory (752), wherein the video controller (704, 706, 752) is in communication with the video monitor (LCD 738, corresponding to display 38), the speaker (speaker 746, corresponding to speaker 46), and the switch (on/off button), and wherein the video controller (704, 706, 752) plays the video content on the video monitor (38, 736) and plays the audio content on the speaker (46, 746) when the switch (on/off button) is activated (powered on by switch).
Carter does not explicitly disclose the video controller having video file storage memory; and a video file including video content and audio content having condition specific information for a specific condition stored in the video file storage memory.
However, Gerstner discloses a multi-media insert (see Figures 120-130) comprising: a video controller (comprised of processor and programable memory of 2758) having video file storage memory (Paragraph [0366], comprised of processor and programable memory of 2758; see processor 4002 and storage device 4006 in Figure 130); and a video file (Paragraph [0397], computer program capable of executing steps disclosed in Paragraphs [0081]-[0364] and Figures 2-119) including video content and audio content having condition specific information for a specific condition stored in the video file storage memory (see Paragraphs [0084]-[0085]).
Because Carter also suggests the video controller is capable of processing video files (see column 7, line 25-31 in Carter), it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective file date of the claimed invention to have substituted the files of Carter for the audio and video files of Gerstner according to known methods to yield the predictable results of allowing the media device to output video and audio content related to the specific condition chosen by the user (see Paragraphs [0084]-[0085] in Gerstner; column 7, line 25-31 in Carter).
Carter in view of Gerstner does not teach wherein the video controller automatically plays the entire video content on the video monitor of the video file and plays the audio content on the speaker when the switch is activated without any further user input.
However, Clegg teaches wherein a video controller (Figure 1 and Paragraphs [0033], [0073]-[0074], microchip 20) automatically plays the entire video content on the video monitor (video screen 113) of the video file (Paragraphs [0074]-[0075], video filed storage in memory of 20) and plays the audio content on the speaker (speaker 16; see Paragraphs [0003], [0006], [0012], [0039]) when the switch (switch 12a; see also Paragraph [0055]) is activated without any further user input (see Paragraphs [0004], [0073]-[0076], [0079]-[0081], [0083]).
Because Carter also teaches playing video content without further user input (see col. 6, ln. 1-25), it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective file date of the claimed invention to have modified the switch and video controller in Carter as modified by Gerstner to automatically play a video file upon opening the device, as taught in Clegg, according to known methods to yield the predictable results of playing a video to communicate a message to a user. Doing so would have also allowed the video content to automatically start playing a pre-recorded message to communicate information to a user (see Paragraphs [0004], [0073]-[0076], [0079]-[0081], [0083] in Clegg).
Regarding claim 6, Carter in view of Gerstner and Clegg teaches the multi-media insert according to claim 1, further comprising (in Carter): a plurality of video files (files stored on memory card 752, as modified by Gerstner) stored in the video file storage memory (memory card 752), wherein each of the plurality of video files (files stored on memory card 752, as modified by Gerstner) includes video image content and video audio content having condition specific information for a specific condition (see Paragraphs [0084]-[0085] in Gerstner; column 7, line 25-31 in Carter), wherein each of the plurality of video files contain different condition specific information (see Paragraphs [0084]-[0085] in Gerstner; column 7, line 25-31 in Carter); a plurality of switches (keys 32, 732) in communication with the video controller (comprised of processors 704, 706 and memory card 752), wherein at least one of the plurality of switches (keys 32, “buttons on the console allow the user to skip forward, pause, rewind, and otherwise efficiently navigate the audio and/or video instructions”) is programmed for the video controller (comprised of processors 704, 706 and memory card 752) to play at least one of the plurality of video files (files stored on memory card 752, as modified by Gerstner) and provide the video image content to the video monitor (38, 738) and the audio content to the speaker (46, 746) when the at least one of the plurality of switches (32, “buttons on the console allow the user to skip forward, pause, rewind, and otherwise efficiently navigate the audio and/or video instructions”) is activated (see Figure 5 and column 8, lines 3-24).
Regarding claim 7, Carter in view of Gerstner and Clegg teaches the multi-media insert according to claim 6, and further teaches (in Carter) wherein the at least one of the plurality of switches (32, “buttons on the console allow the user to skip forward, pause, rewind, and otherwise efficiently navigate the audio and/or video instructions”) controls playback functions (see column 8, lines 3-24) of the video file (files stored on memory card 752, as modified by Gerstner).
Regarding claim 10, Carter in view of Gerstner and Clegg teaches the multi-media insert according to claim 6, and further teaches wherein one video file (file associated with “multiple injury”) of the plurality of video files (files stored on memory card 752, as modified by Gerstner) contains condition specific information for a first condition (multiple injury), and wherein a second video file (file associated with “CPR unconscious”) of the plurality of video files (files stored on memory card 752, as modified by Gerstner) contains condition specific information for a second condition (CPR unconscious button 32), wherein one switch of the plurality of switches (multiple injury button 32) is programmed for the video controller (704, 706, 752, as modified by Gerstner) to play the one video file (file associated with “multiple injury”) and a second switch of the plurality of switches (CPR unconscious button 32) is programmed for the video controller (704, 706, 752, as modified by Gerstner) to play the second video file (file associated with “CPR unconscious”).
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carter (US Patent No. 9286440), Gerstner (US Publication No. 2020/0375825), Clegg (US Publication No. 2011/0311196), and in further view of Sergio (US Publication No. 2006/0197656).
Regarding claim 8, Carter in view of Gerstner and Clegg teaches the multi-media insert according to claim 1, but does not teach wherein the audio content contains audio content in more than one language.
However, Sergio teaches wherein audio content of a multi-media device contains audio content in more than one language (see Paragraph [0013], claim 8, and Figure 1).
Because Carter also suggests switches for language selection (see column 5, lines 21-24), it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective file date of the claimed invention to have modified the audio content of Carter as modified by Gerstner and Clegg to be provided in more than one language, as taught in Sergio. Doing so would have improved the functionality of the device by allowing a user to play the audio content/instructions in a language of their choosing (see Paragraph [0013], claim 8, and Figure 1 in Sergio).
Regarding claim 9, Carter in view of Gerstner and Clegg teaches the multi-media insert according to claim 6, but does not teach wherein the audio content contains audio content in at least two languages, and wherein one of the plurality of switches is programmed to select one of the at least two languages when the at least one video of the plurality of videos is played on the video monitor and the speaker.
However, Sergio teaches wherein audio content of a multi-media device contains audio content in at least two languages (see Paragraph [0013], claim 8, and Figure 1), and wherein one of the plurality of switches (17) is programmed to select one of the at least two languages (Figure 1 and claim 8, English and Spanish) when the at least one video of the plurality of videos (videos played 13, corresponding to video played on video display 38 of Carter) is played on the video monitor (13) and the speaker (speaker 12, corresponding to speaker 46 in Carter).
Because Carter also suggests switches for language selection (see column 5, lines 21-24), it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective file date of the claimed invention to have modified the audio content of Carter as modified by Gerstner and Clegg to be provided in more than one language, as taught in Sergio. Doing so would have improved the functionality of the device by allowing a user to play the audio content/instructions in a language of their choosing (see Paragraph [0013], claim 8, and Figure 1 in Sergio).
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carter (US Patent No. 9286440), Gerstner (US Publication No. 2020/0375825), Clegg (US Publication No. 2011/0311196), and in further view of Low (US Publication No. 2020/0265938), Probert (US Publication No. 2006/0137694), Curran (US Publication No. 2006/0122868), Hammond (US Publication No. 2002/0104774), and Townsend (US Publication No. 2008/0121554).
Regarding claim 11, Carter in view of Gerstner and Clegg teaches the multi-media insert according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the condition is selected from a group consisting of drug overdoses (button 12), choking (button 3), CPR (button 2), cardiac arrest (button 8), heat related illnesses (button 6), burns (button 10), lacerations (button 4), bone fractures (button 5), basic first aid (button 1), eye injuries (button 11), dental injuries (button 7), biohazardous spills (button 9).
Gerstner also teaches conditions related to snake bites (see Paragraph [0381]) and allergic reactions (see Paragraph [0282]).
Carter as modified by Gerstner and Clegg does not teach wherein the condition is selected from disposal of medications, drowning and near drowning conditions, blood borne pathogen incidents, pet first aid, and food related illness.
Low teaches a condition related to disposal of medications (see Paragraph [0034]).
Probert teaches a condition related to drowning and near drowning conditions (see Paragraph [0021]).
Curran teaches a condition related to blood borne pathogen incidents (see Paragraphs [0002]-[0004] and Figures 5-7).
Hammond teaches a condition related to pet first aid (see Paragraph [0047]).
Townsend teaches a condition related to food related illnesses (see Paragraph [0034]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective file date of the claimed invention to have combined the identified conditions taught in Gerstner, Low, Probert, Curran, Townsend, and Hammond to the conditions taught in Carter as previously modified by Gerstner and Clegg. Doing so would have increased the functionality of the device by allowing a user to received training information for a variety of medical-related conditions.
Regarding claim 12, Carter in view of Gerstner and Clegg teaches the multi-media insert according to claim 10, and further teaches wherein the first condition and the second condition are each selected from a group consisting of drug overdoses (button 12), choking (button 3), CPR (button 2), cardiac arrest (button 8), heat related illnesses (button 6), burns (button 10), lacerations (button 4), bone fractures (button 5), basic first aid (button 1), eye injuries (button 11), dental injuries (button 7), biohazardous spills (button 9), wherein the first condition and second condition are different (see Figure 3).
Gerstner also teaches conditions related to snake bites (see Paragraph [0381]) and allergic reactions (see Paragraph [0282]).
Carter as modified by Gerstner and Clegg does not teach wherein the condition is selected from disposal of medications, drowning and near drowning conditions, blood borne pathogen incidents, pet first aid, and food related illness.
Low teaches a condition related to disposal of medications (see Paragraph [0034]).
Probert teaches a condition related to drowning and near drowning conditions (see Paragraph [0021]).
Curran teaches a condition related to blood borne pathogen incidents (see Paragraphs [0002]-[0004] and Figures 5-7).
Hammond teaches a condition related to pet first aid (see Paragraph [0047]).
Townsend teaches a condition related to food related illnesses (see Paragraph [0034]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective file date of the claimed invention to have combined the identified conditions taught in Gerstner, Low, Probert, Curran, Townsend, and Hammond to the conditions taught in Carter as previously modified by Gerstner and Clegg. Doing so would have increased the functionality of the device by allowing a user to received training information for a variety of medical-related conditions.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gerstner (US Publication No. 2020/0375825), Clegg (US Publication No. 2011/0311196), and in further view of Beadles (US Publication No. 2014/0325328).
Regarding claim 14, Gerstner in view of Clegg teaches the multi-media insert according to claim 1, but does not teach a code scannable by a mobile device that retrieves and plays an internet-based video file that has substantially the same video content and substantially the same audio content as the video file stored in the video file storage memory.
However, Beadles teaches (see Figures 8 and 31-38) a code scannable (Figure 31, scannable tag 31-01) by a mobile device (device 31-03) that retrieves and plays an internet-based video file (file uploaded to 31-04) that has substantially the same video content and substantially the same audio content as the video file stored in the video file storage memory (see Paragraphs [0099]-[0145] and Figures 31-38, where app-based videos stored on a first device are uploaded to the internet, and then downloaded by a mobile device to be viewed by a user).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective file date of the claimed invention to have combined the scannable codes of Beadles to the multi-media device of Gerstner as modified by Clegg after uploading the videos taught in Gerstner to the internet as taught in Beadles. Doing so would have allowed a user to access the videos on a mobile device (see Paragraphs [0099]-[0145] and Figures 31-38 in Beadles).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gerstner (US Publication No. 2020/0375825), Clegg (US Publication No. 2011/0311196), and in further view of Templeton (US Publication No. 2019/0038481).
Regarding claim 15, Gerstner in view of Clegg teaches the multi-media insert according to claim 1, but does not teach at least one near field communication chip, wherein the near field communication chip is programmed for a mobile device to dial emergency services.
However, Templeton teaches at least one near field communication chip (Paragraph [0047], embedded NFC), wherein the near field communication chip (embedded NFC) is programmed for a mobile device (wearable device) to dial emergency services (see Paragraph [0047]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective file date of the claimed invention to have combined the wearable NFC device of Templeton to the multi-media device of Gerstner as modified by Clegg. Doing so would have increased the functionality of the device by allowing a user to call 911 through a pre-programmed mobile device (see Paragraph [0047] in Templeton).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gerstner (US Publication No. 2020/0375825), Clegg (US Publication No. 2011/0311196), and in further view of Beadles (US Publication No. 2014/0325328) and Walker (US Publication No. 2019/0332912).
Regarding claim 16, Gerstner in view of Clegg teaches the multi-media insert according to claim 1, but does not teach at least one near field communication chip, wherein the near field communication chip is programmed for a mobile device to retrieve and play an internet-based video file that has substantially the same video content and substantially the same audio content as the video file stored in the video file storage memory.
However, Beadles teaches at least one RFID chip (Figure 30, RFID tag 30-01), wherein the RFID chip (30-01) is programmed for a mobile device (Figure 31, device 31-03) to retrieve and play an internet-based video file (see Figures 30-38) that has substantially the same video content and substantially the same audio content as the video file stored in the video file storage memory (see Paragraphs [0099]-[0145] and Figures 30-38, where apps-based videos stored on a first device are uploaded to the internet, and then downloaded by a mobile device to be viewed by a user).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective file date of the claimed invention to have combined the RFID tags of Beadles to the multi-media device of Gerstner as modified by Clegg after uploading the app-based videos taught in Gerstner to the internet as taught in Beadles. Doing so would have allowed a user to access the videos on a mobile device (see Paragraphs [0099]-[0145] and Figures 30-38, in Beadles).
Gerstner in view of Clegg and Beadles does not explicitly teach wherein the RFID chip is an NFC chip.
However, Walker teaches at least one RFID chip (Figure 1, NFC tag 200), wherein the NFC chip (200) is programmed for a mobile device (mobile device 350) to retrieve and play an internet-based video file (see Paragraphs [0003], [0030]-[0031], [0038]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective file date of the claimed invention to have substituted the RFID chip of Gerstner as modified by Clegg and Beadles for the NFC chip of Walker according to known methods to yield the predictable results of using a frequency-based device to access internet-based video content (see Paragraphs [0003], [0030]-[0031], [0038] in Walker).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GAGE STEPHEN CRUM whose telephone number is (571)272-3373. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Allen Parker can be reached at (303)297-4722. 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.
/GAGE CRUM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841
gsc
Prosecution Insights