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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s “Response to Amendment and Reconsideration” filed on 6/23/2026 has been considered.
Claims 1-6, 8-15, 17-18 are allowed. Claims 7 and 16 are cancelled. Claims 21-22 are added. Claims 1-6, 8-15, 17-22 are pending in this application and an action on the merits follows.
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 19-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jones et al (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2005/0183928), in view of Shibata (JP Patent Publication No. 2020/024591).
Regarding claim 19, Jones teaches a first money handling apparatus configured to detect, using a sensor a degree of damage to money, (one or more sensors which can be employed to count, denominate, authenticate, determine fitness, image, and/or otherwise discriminate, evaluate, and/or analyze the bills may be disposed between locations I and II, [114]);
sort the money, according to the degree of damage, into fit money used for dispensing transactions and unfit money which is not used for the dispensing transactions, (a bank branch uses an on-site multiple pocket sorter to process currency received at a branch. According to some embodiments, the sorter is used to separate the bills received by denomination. According to some embodiments, the sorter is alternatively or additionally used to separate bills received by fitness (e.g., separate bills between fit and unfit bills or separate bills as to being ATM fit, fit, or unfit), [195]
further sort the fit money, according to the degree of damage of the fit money into first fit money and second fit money having a degree of damage different from the first fit money, (the sorter also sorts fit bills between ATM quality and non-ATM quality, [195]);
and perform a plurality of types of dispensing transactions including a first dispensing transaction in which the first fit money is dispensed and a second dispensing transaction in which the second fit money is dispensed, (ATMs require bills to be dispensed therefrom to be of a very high quality or fitness, e.g., very stiff without folds, tears, wrinkles, or holes, low soil levels, etc. Fit non-ATM quality bills may be used by the bank to provide to its customers by means other than ATMs such as by tellers, [195], During the day, money including currency bills is provided to customers (e.g., via tellers or ATMs) thereby reducing the amount of money held by the bank branch. Additionally, during the day, customers deposit money including currency bills at the bank branch, [192]),
a management apparatus including processing circuitry configured to acquire transaction information from a first money handling apparatus, (information about the bills processed by each sorter connected to the network is automatically transmitted to the bank's computer system and may be provided to a home office, [206], ATMs are also connected to the network and they provide information to the central office concerning how much money has been dispensed, their need for currency replenishment, and/or how full their deposit bins are, [208, 214]),
determine, when the first money handling apparatus needs to be replenished with money, a breakdown of the money for replenishment based on the transaction information, (If during the day, the branch dispensed $10,000 of fit and $10,000 of ATM fit $20 bills, it would have a need for $10,000 of fit and $10,000 of ATM fit $20 bills to replenish its inventories to their target levels, [199]),
wherein the breakdown indicates a quantity of each fitness-type of money including the first fit money and the second fit money to be included in the money for replenishment, (branch having such a sorter on its premises is that the inventory levels of bills and the breakdown of those inventories e.g., by denomination, fit, ATM fit, and unfit, counterfeit, etc. may be counted and/or determined automatically by the sorter, [199, 202].
determine whether the money for replenishment may be dispensed by a second money handling apparatus based on the breakdown, (the networked sorting system determines that Branch 1 (1801a) has $5,000 in excess $1 bills and $10,000 in excess $20 bills. Of the $10,000 in excess in $20 bills, $4,000 are of ATM fit quality, [210]. The system also determines that Branch 2 (1801b), which may be physically close to Branch 1 has a shortage of $1 and $20 bills. More specifically, the system determines that Branch 2 needs $5,000 in $1 bills and $9,000 in $20 bills including $4,000 in ATM quality $20 bills. Using this information, the system, such as via a processor within the system, determines that $5,000 in $1 bills, $4,000 in ATM fit $20 bills, and $5,500 in $20 bills should be transferred from Branch 1 to Branch 2 [210]).
Jones does not explicitly disclose in a case that the processing circuitry determines that the money for replenishment may be dispensed by the second money handling apparatus, notify the second money handing apparatus to dispense the money for replenishment; and a second money handling apparatus configured to dispense the money for replenishment based on the breakdown of the money determined by the processing circuitry in a case that the second money handling apparatus receives the notification from the management apparatus.
However teaches As shown in FIG. 1, a cash center system 100 according to the present invention mainly includes a plurality of cash processing devices (111a to 111d) installed in a cash center 110, the cash processing device 111 only needs to be a device capable of stocking and dispensing banknotes by denomination, and here, a banknote depositing and dispensing device (TCR) for a staff member installed at a bank counter is used. [11], As shown in FIG. 2 (a), the TCR 200 has a deposit port 211 for depositing (loading) bills, a dispensing port 212 for discharging bills, and a display on the near side (operator side) thereof. A portion 213 is provided. When the bill is discharged from the dispensing port 212, the display unit 213, [12], banknote cassettes 1 to 5 (221 to 225) capable of storing and dispensing banknotes, [13], A plan of how many kinds of bills and how many kinds of bills are to be loaded into each of the plurality of cash processing apparatuses and how to withdraw money is made…based on the plan, the management server controls the dispensing operation of the cash processing device, prepares banknotes according to the request of each bank, [11], Note: controls rather than notifies but controlling the dispensing operation requires the server to communicate a dispensing instruction to the controlled device. Next, in consideration of how to make the bills of the denominated / quantity counted from the plurality of cash processing devices of the cash center in parallel processing more efficient, the bills are transferred to each bill depositing / dispensing device. The denomination and quantity of bills to be loaded by dispersing the bills are determined, [16]. requests from each bank branch are distributed to each TCR. That is, the dispensing process for one request is distributed so as to be processed in parallel by a plurality of TCRs, [18], FIG. 8, during the dispensing operation from each TCR, a specific TCR runs out of banknotes, or a delay occurs in the entire dispensing operation due to the occurrence of some abnormality, and the remaining work amount at each work terminal. If an imbalance occurs, the work distribution can be automatically reviewed and optimization can be performed again, [25].
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the method of Jones, to include the above limitations, as taught by De Leo, in order to improve transaction execution reliability, [7].
Regarding claim 20, Jones does not explicitly disclose, however Shibata teaches the processing circuitry is further configured to, in a case that the processing circuitry determines that the money for replenishment may not be dispensed by the second money handling apparatus, provide notification that dispensing of the money is not possible, (n FIG. 8, during the dispensing operation from each TCR, a specific TCR runs out of banknotes, or a delay occurs in the entire dispensing operation due to the occurrence of some abnormality, and the remaining work amount at each work terminal, [25].
Regarding claims 21-22, Jones teaches the second money handling apparatus is separate from the first money handling apparatus, installed at first location, and the second money handling apparatus is installed at a second location different from the first location, (the system also determines that Branch 2 (1801b), which may be physically close to Branch 1.. Because Branches 1 and 2 are in close proximity, [210]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments 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.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MILENA RACIC whose telephone number is (571)270-5933. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30am-4pm 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, Florian (Ryan) Zeender can be reached at (571)272-6790. 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.
/MILENA RACIC/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3627
/FLORIAN M ZEENDER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3627
Prosecution Insights