DETAILED ACTION
Amendment received on December 4, 2025 has been acknowledged. Claims 1, 4-8, 11-15 and 18-21 have been amended and entered. Therefore, claims 1-21 are pending.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 December 4, 2025 has been entered.
Examiner’s Statement regarding 35 USC 101
Based on internal guidance, it was determined that claims 1-21 should be rejected under 35 USC 101, which is provided below. In view of the Subject Matter Eligibility Declaration (SMED) memo, Examiner recommends that the Applicant file a 37 CFR 1.132 declaration to address the 101 rejection.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed December 4, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues: “Nothing in Coleman, or any of the cited documents, teaches or suggests executing a particular ATM configuration on a plurality of ATMs within a predefined distance of an event location, as recited in claim 1. Further, there would be no reason to modify the single service aspect to Coleman to include such an arrangement. In fact, any modification of Coleman to include a plurality of kiosks would render Coleman unsuitable for its intended purpose because the kiosks would not be tailored to the airline of the particular user at the kiosk. Ashino fails to cure these deficiencies.”
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Coleman explicitly states that an administration tool (Figure 4, Screen 400) allows for adding a remote site and setting up multiple kiosk, for example kiosk #01-#12. Coleman ¶ [0015], further describes customer environments as a hotel, a shopping mall, a bank a college or university, a store such as a coffee shop. A business environment, include hotels, restaurants, florists, catalog businesses. Coleman ¶ [0017] further states:
kiosk can be tailored to provide functions, such as, passenger reservations, airline check in, hotel reservation and check in, rental car reservation and pickup and can be located in any environment that is conducive for its intended functions, such as, checking in passengers for airline flights.
The cited portion of Coleman teaches that the kiosks are located in an environment where an event, such as an airline flight is taking place. One of ordinary skill would recognize that the kiosk are positioned at a distance from where the actual airline flight is occurring. Although Coleman is silent as to what the predetermined distance would be, Applicant has failed to describe how the predetermined distance of the kiosk from an event solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally well with kiosk located at a hotel lobby for check-in or at an airport for a flight.
Applicant argues: “Claims 2-4 and 7 depend from claim 1 and are allowable for at least the same reasons as their base claim and further in view of the additional novel and non-obvious features recited therein. Accordingly, Applicant requests withdrawal of these rejections.”
As stated above, the Coleman-Ashino et al. combination teaches the elements of the claimed invention and the dependent claims fail to overcome the prior art of record.
Applicant argues: “Independent claims 8 and 15 recite features similar to claim 1 and are allowable for at least the same reasons as discussed above with respect to claim 1. Accordingly, Applicant requests withdrawal of the rejection of claims 8 and 15, as well as claims 9-11, 14, 16-18, and 21 that depend from one of claims 8 or 15.”
Examiner respectfully disagrees. As stated above, claims 8 and 15 recite similar language to claim 1 and Coleman et al., teaches where multiple kiosk can be configured and located from where an event is taking place.
Applicant argues: “Claims 5, 12, and 19 depend from claims 1, 8, and 15, respectively, and are allowable for at least the same reasons as their base claims and further in view of the additional novel and non-obvious features recited therein. The addition of Guntupalli fails to cure the deficiencies of Coleman and Ashino. Accordingly, Applicant requests withdrawal of these rejections.”
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Coleman teaches the ability to change the configuration of multiple kiosk in customer and business environments. Ashino is combined to teach where, respective pieces of financial institution software of a plurality of financial institutions to virtually start up on base software; and when the financial institution to be used is designated, cause the financial institution software of said financial institution to be operated so that transaction processing that can be provided via an own transaction device of said financial institution is executed.
Guntupalli is combined to teach the ability to send a denial or approval response to self-service terminals in order to approve or deny a transaction, since Coleman and Ashino both fail to disclose the claimed feature.
Applicant argues: “Claims 6, 13, and 20 depend from claims 1, 8, and 15, respectively, and are allowable for at least the same reasons as their base claims and further in view of the additional novel and non-obvious features recited therein. The addition of Tendulkar fails to cure the deficiencies of Coleman and Ashino. Accordingly, Applicant requests withdrawal of these rejections.”
Examiner respectfully disagrees. As stated above the Coleman-Ashino combination teaches the claimed invention. Tendulkar et al. is combined to teach the limitations of a machine learning model programmed to provide recommendations to users at a kiosk. Therefore, the Coleman-Ashino-Tendulkar et al. combination teaches the claimed limitations.
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.
Claims 1-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s):
Under Step 2A (prong 1), and taking claim 1 as representative, claim 1 recites a: receive, from a first enterprise organization, a request to associate a plurality of automated teller machines (ATM) with the first enterprise organization, wherein the request to associate the first ATM includes information identifying the first enterprise organization and the plurality of ATMs and wherein the plurality of ATMs are located within a predefined distance of an event location;
retrieve, based on the information identifying the first enterprise organization, an ATM configuration associated with the first enterprise organization;
initiate a communication session with the plurality of ATMs;
generate an instruction causing the plurality of ATMs to execute the ATM configuration associated with the first enterprise organization; and
transmit, to the plurality of ATMs within the predefined distance of the event location, the instruction causing the plurality of ATMs to execute the ATM configuration associated with the first enterprise organization, wherein transmitting the instruction causes the plurality of ATMs to display information identifying the first enterprise organization and provide functionality identified by the first enterprise organization and included in the ATM configuration associated with the first enterprise organization, wherein the functionality identified by the first enterprise organization includes functionality associated with receiving and dispensing funds.
These limitations recite ‘certain methods of organizing human activity’, such as by performing commercial interactions (see: MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)CD). This is because claim 1 sets forth or describes commercial or legal interactions, such as receiving and dispensing funds. This represents the performance of business relations, which is a commercial interaction and falls under organizing human activity.
Accordingly, under step 2A (prong 1) claim 1 recites an abstract idea because claim 1 recites limitations that fall within the “Certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas.
Under Step 2A (prong 2), the abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application. The Examiner acknowledges that representative claim 1 does recite additional elements, one processor, a communication interface, memory storing computer-readable instructions and a plurality of ATMs.
Although reciting these additional elements, taken alone or in combination these elements are not sufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. This is because the additional elements of claim 1 are recited at a high level of generality (i.e. as generic computing hardware) such that they amount to nothing more than the mere instructions to implement or apply the abstract idea on generic computing hardware (or, merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea). Further, the additional elements do no more than generally link the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (such as the Internet or computing networks).
Secondly, the additional elements are insufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because the claim fails to (i) reflect an improvement in the functioning of a computer, or an improvement to other technology or technical field, (ii) implement the judicial exception with, or use the judicial exception in conjunction with, a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim, (iii) effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, or (iv) applies or uses the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment. In addition to the above, displaying information identifying the first enterprise organization represent little more than extra-solution activity (e.g. data gathering or outputting) that contributes only nominally or insignificantly to the execution of the claimed method (see: MPEP 2106.05(g)).
In view of the above, under Step 2A (prong 2), claim 1 does not integrate the recited exception into a practical application.
Under Step 2B, examiners should evaluate additional elements individually and in combination to determine whether they provide an inventive concept (i.e., whether the additional elements amount to significantly more than the exception itself). In this case, the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Returning to representative claim 1, taken individually or as a whole the additional elements of claim 1 do not provide an inventive concept (i.e. they do not amount to “significantly more” than the exception itself). As discussed above with respect to the integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements used to perform the claimed process amount to no more than the mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer and/or no more than a general link to a technological environment.
Furthermore, the additional elements fail to provide significantly more also because the claim simply appends well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality, to the judicial exception. For example, the additional elements of claim 1 utilize operations the courts have held to be well-understood, routine, and conventional (see: MPEP 2106.05(d)(II)), including at least:
receiving or transmitting data over a network,
storing or retrieving information from memory,
presenting offers
Even considered as an ordered combination (as a whole), the additional elements of claim 1 do not add anything further than when they are considered individually.
In view of the above, representative claim 1 does not provide an inventive concept (“significantly more”) under Step 2B, and is therefore ineligible for patenting.
Regarding independent claim 8 and independent claim 15, recite at least substantially similar concepts and elements as recited in claims 1 such that similar analysis of the claims would be readily apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art. As such, claims 8 and 15 are rejected under 35 USC 101 for at least similar rationale.
The dependent claims also are patent ineligible. For example, claims 2, 9 and 16 include the ATM configuration associated with the first enterprise further includes one or more interface for display which further describes a generic computer component, described at a high level of generality performing generic computer functions.
Claims 3, 10 and 17 further describe generic computer functions of receiving and storing data.
Claims 4, 11 and 18 are further describe a participant in the commercial interaction by defining the difference between a first organization and an organization implementing the platform and maintaining the ATMs.
Claims 5, 12 and 19 further describe the commercial interaction between a user and the first enterprise and generic computer functions of transmitting a request and processing a transaction.
Claims 6, 13 and 20 describe a machine learning model used to generate a recommendation and send and receive data over the internet, which is mere software to execute the abstract idea.
Claims 7, 14 and 21 further describe the abstract idea with limitations directed to transmitting data over a network and storing and retrieving information in memory, which are generic computer functions that are well understood, routine and conventional activity.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-4, 7-11, 14-18 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Coleman et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication 2008/0010375 in view of Ashino et al., WIPO WO
As per Claim 1, Coleman et al., discloses a computing platform (Figure 1B, Airport Environment), comprising:
at least one processor (pg.1, ¶ [0014] discusses a processing system having one or more processors);
a communication interface communicatively coupled to the at least one processor (pg.1, ¶ [0014] discusses high speed communication devices); and
a memory storing computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor (pg.1, ¶ [0014] discusses memory), cause the computing platform to:
receive, from a first enterprise organization, a request to associate a plurality of kiosk with the first enterprise organization (pg.2, ¶ [0020] discusses the configuration information returned to the self-service CLA 134 specifies the information, such as, applicable airlines appropriate for a particular kiosk),
wherein the request to associate the first kiosk includes information identifying the first enterprise organization and the plurality of kiosks and wherein the plurality of kiosk are located within a predefined distance of an event location1 (pg.2, ¶ [0021] discusses Configuration information includes selection of airline applications that are to be available on specific kiosks…kiosk at a hotel in Atlanta could be configured to allow guests to check in to airlines A, B, C, D, and E using self-service applications provided by the airlines A, B, C, D, and E….pg.2, ¶ [0017] discusses a kiosk can be tailored to provide functions, such as, passenger reservations, airline check in, hotel reservation and check in, rental car reservation and pickup and can be located in any environment that is conducive for its intended functions, such as, checking in passengers for airline flights…Figure 4, depicts where a plurality of kiosk are capable of being configured at a location);
retrieve, based on the information identifying the first enterprise organization, a kiosk configuration associated with the first enterprise organization (pg.3, ¶[0035] discusses In a second option, the XYZAirlines changes the application configuration to be installed on a remote kiosk to point to URL http://localhost/kioskcheckin:xxxx, where xxxx is an IP port number defined by the centralized data center 106);
initiate a communication session with the first kiosk (pg.3, ¶ [0036] discusses a tunnel endpoint, such as tunnel endpoint 140, on a remote site kiosk, such as the remote kiosk 108, is set up to receive incoming requests from an airline application. The application running on the remote kiosk, such as kiosk App 126 communicates with the tunnel endpoint 140 by opening an Internet protocol (IP) connection to "localhost". The tunnel endpoint 140 running on the remote kiosk 108, the local box, and is using Internet protocol to communication with the tunnel endpoint 140 rather than over a network);
generate an instruction causing the plurality of kiosk to execute the kiosk configuration associated with the first enterprise organization (pg.5, ¶[0044] discusses The kiosk enabling process includes mapping of the name of the remote kiosk to a naming convention consistent with the airline network. By enabling the access, an airline application on the remote kiosk 108 would then be available for consumer use); and
transmit, to the plurality of kiosks within the predefined distance of the event location, the instruction causing the plurality of kiosks to execute the kiosk configuration associated with the first enterprise organization (pg.5, ¶ [0045] discusses Kiosks may be personalized to a configuration for XYZ Airline by associating the kiosks with an airport code and name mapping in the remote site environment…pg.4, ¶ [0040] discusses single centralized server 137 may service many remote kiosks acting as a common endpoint for the remote kiosks. All of the kiosks talk to one endpoint),
wherein transmitting the instruction causes the plurality of kiosk to display information identifying the first enterprise organization and provide functionality identified by the first enterprise organization and included in the kiosk configuration associated with the first enterprise organization (pg.5, ¶ [0043] discusses the new kiosk or kiosks are then made available for use at the remote site).
Coleman et al. teaches a system and method for automatically providing remote self-service facilities administration over an Internet protocol. The self-service kiosk of Coleman et al., is capable of hosting multiple airlines on a single kiosk.
The sole difference between the primary reference and the claimed subject matter is that the primary reference does not disclose an ATM as claimed. The primary reference allows airlines to upload configuration data onto a single kiosk.
Ashino et al., discloses the trading device 1 is equipped with ATM software 11 of each of a plurality of financial institutions, and when a desired financial institution is selected by a customer, the ATM software 11 of that financial institution operates, and the trading device 1 operates. It provides the same functions as the ATM of the selected financial institution. In other words, the trading device 1 provides all the functions provided by the ATM of the selected financial institution (pg.3, lines 14-18).
The secondary references, Ashino et al., shows that an ATM is configured with ATM software of a plurality of financial institutions and a user is capable of selecting a financial institution to operate the kiosk was known in the prior art before the effective filing date of the invention.
Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself- that is in the substitution of the ATM of the secondary reference(s) for the self-service kiosk of the primary reference.
Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
As per Claim 2, Coleman et al. discloses the computing platform of claim 1, wherein the kiosk configuration associated with the first enterprise organization further includes one or more user interfaces for display (pg.2, ¶ [0022] discusses the self-service CLA 134 requests this information from the Config/Stats DB 139 via the central platform services application 136 to determine which application to run and display as available at specific times during the day).
The cited portion teaches where the kiosk is displaying airline application during a specific times during the day.
However, Coleman et al., fails to disclose an ATM.
Ashino teaches an ATM (pg.3, lines 18-21 discusses The trading device 1 is equipped with ATM software 11 of each of a plurality of financial institutions, and when a desired financial institution is selected by a customer, the ATM software 11 of that financial institution operates, and the trading device 1 operates. It provides the same functions as the ATM of the selected financial institution. In other words, the trading device 1 provides all the functions provided by the ATM of the selected financial institution).
Coleman et al. teaches a system and method for automatically providing remote self-service facilities administration over an Internet protocol. The self-service kiosk of Coleman et al., is capable of hosting multiple airlines on a single kiosk.
The sole difference between the primary reference and the claimed subject matter is that the primary reference does not disclose an ATM as claimed. The primary reference allows airlines to upload configuration data onto a single kiosk.
Ashino et al., discloses the trading device 1 is equipped with ATM software 11 of each of a plurality of financial institutions, and when a desired financial institution is selected by a customer, the ATM software 11 of that financial institution operates, and the trading device 1 operates. It provides the same functions as the ATM of the selected financial institution. In other words, the trading device 1 provides all the functions provided by the ATM of the selected financial institution (pg.3, lines 14-18).
The secondary references, Ashino et al., shows that an ATM is configured with ATM software of a plurality of financial institutions and a user is capable of selecting a financial institution to operate the kiosk was known in the prior art before the effective filing date of the invention.
Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself- that is in the substitution of the ATM of the secondary reference(s) for the self-service kiosk of the primary reference.
Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
As per Claim 3, Coleman et al. discloses the computing platform of claim 1, further including instructions that, when executed, cause the at least one processor to:
receive registration data from a plurality of enterprise organizations including at least the first enterprise organization (pg.3, ¶ [0023] discusses the self-service App 126, as supplied by an airline and by means of the secure information flow of the centralized data center 106),
the registration data including kiosk configurations for each enterprise organization of the plurality of enterprise organizations (pg.4, ¶ [0042] discusses the supervisor/administrator selects an appropriate configuration setting, such as, enabling an airline on the remote kiosk, setting the availability times, changing the name that the remote site kiosk application knows the kiosk by, and the like; and
store the registration data (pg.5, ¶ [0046] discusses the supervisor/administrator may activate the save button 518 to save the information and return to a main menu).
As per Claim 4, Coleman et al., discloses the computing platform of claim 1, wherein the first enterprise organization is different from an enterprise organization implementing the computing platform and that maintains the plurality of kiosk (pg.5, ¶ [0045] discusses a main group 505 for "National Hotels", a subgroup 506 for "Sunny Day Inn", a site name 507"Orlando Airport", a kiosk name 508"NHS-OIA-Kl", an airline city code 509 selected from a drop down menu, and an airline kiosk name conversion 510"MCONHSD1").
The Examiner is construing the Sunny Day Inn as an enterprise different from the airline implementing the kiosk.
However, Coleman et al., fails to disclose an ATM.
Ashino teaches an ATM (pg.3, lines 18-21 discusses The trading device 1 is equipped with ATM software 11 of each of a plurality of financial institutions, and when a desired financial institution is selected by a customer, the ATM software 11 of that financial institution operates, and the trading device 1 operates. It provides the same functions as the ATM of the selected financial institution. In other words, the trading device 1 provides all the functions provided by the ATM of the selected financial institution).
Coleman et al. teaches a system and method for automatically providing remote self-service facilities administration over an Internet protocol. The self-service kiosk of Coleman et al., is capable of hosting multiple airlines on a single kiosk.
The sole difference between the primary reference and the claimed subject matter is that the primary reference does not disclose an ATM as claimed. The primary reference allows airlines to upload configuration data onto a single kiosk.
Ashino et al., discloses the trading device 1 is equipped with ATM software 11 of each of a plurality of financial institutions, and when a desired financial institution is selected by a customer, the ATM software 11 of that financial institution operates, and the trading device 1 operates. It provides the same functions as the ATM of the selected financial institution. In other words, the trading device 1 provides all the functions provided by the ATM of the selected financial institution (pg.3, lines 14-18).
The secondary references, Ashino et al., shows that an ATM is configured with ATM software of a plurality of financial institutions and a user is capable of selecting a financial institution to operate the kiosk was known in the prior art before the effective filing date of the invention.
Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself- that is in the substitution of the ATM of the secondary reference(s) for the self-service kiosk of the primary reference.
Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
As per Claim 7, Coleman et al., discloses the computing platform of claim 1, further including instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the computing platform to:
after transmitting, to the plurality of kiosk, the instruction causing the plurality of kiosks to execute kiosk configuration associated with the first enterprise organization (pg.5, ¶ [0045] discusses Kiosks may be personalized to a configuration for XYZ Airline by associating the kiosks with an airport code and name mapping in the remote site environment);
receive, from a second enterprise organization different from the first enterprise organization, a request to associate at least a first kiosk of the plurality of kiosks with the second enterprise organization (pg.5, ¶ [045] discusses For each airline that uses a kiosk, the configuration information for that kiosk is set up specific for that airline),
wherein the request to associate the at least the first kiosk includes information identifying the second enterprise organization and the first self- service kiosk (Figure 5, depicts Kiosk Configuration 500, depicts XYZ Airline, which allows each airline to configure settings specific to their airline, Kiosk Name 508);
retrieve, based on the information identifying the second enterprise organization, a ATM kiosk configuration associated with the second enterprise organization (pg.3, ¶[0035] discusses In a second option, the XYZAirlines changes the application configuration to be installed on a remote kiosk to point to URL http://localhost/kioskcheckin:xxxx, where xxxx is an IP port number defined by the centralized data center 106);
generate an instruction causing the at least the first kiosk of the plurality of kiosk to execute the kiosk configuration associated with the second enterprise organization (pg.5, ¶[0044] discusses The kiosk enabling process includes mapping of the name of the remote kiosk to a naming convention consistent with the airline network. By enabling the access, an airline application on the remote kiosk 108 would then be available for consumer use); and
transmit, to the at least the first kiosk, the instruction causing the at least the first kiosk to execute the kiosk configuration associated with the second enterprise organization (pg.5, ¶ [0045] discusses Kiosks may be personalized to a configuration for XYZ Airline by associating the kiosks with an airport code and name mapping in the remote site environment),
wherein transmitting the instruction causes the at least the first kiosk to display information identifying the second enterprise organization and provide functionality identified by the second enterprise organization and included in the kiosk configuration associated with the second enterprise organization (pg.5, ¶ [0043] discusses the new kiosk or kiosks are then made available for use at the remote site).
The cited portion of Coleman teaches a system and method capable of allowing system administrators from different airlines to configure available terminals at different business locations. Therefore the system allows for a second enterprise to remotely configure kiosk.
However, Coleman et al., fails to disclose an ATM.
Ashino teaches an ATM (pg.3, lines 18-21 discusses The trading device 1 is equipped with ATM software 11 of each of a plurality of financial institutions, and when a desired financial institution is selected by a customer, the ATM software 11 of that financial institution operates, and the trading device 1 operates. It provides the same functions as the ATM of the selected financial institution. In other words, the trading device 1 provides all the functions provided by the ATM of the selected financial institution).
Coleman et al. teaches a system and method for automatically providing remote self-service facilities administration over an Internet protocol. The self-service kiosk of Coleman et al., is capable of hosting multiple airlines on a single kiosk.
The sole difference between the primary reference and the claimed subject matter is that the primary reference does not disclose an ATM as claimed. The primary reference allows airlines to upload configuration data onto a single kiosk.
Ashino et al., discloses the trading device 1 is equipped with ATM software 11 of each of a plurality of financial institutions, and when a desired financial institution is selected by a customer, the ATM software 11 of that financial institution operates, and the trading device 1 operates. It provides the same functions as the ATM of the selected financial institution. In other words, the trading device 1 provides all the functions provided by the ATM of the selected financial institution (pg.3, lines 14-18).
The secondary references, Ashino et al., shows that an ATM is configured with ATM software of a plurality of financial institutions and a user is capable of selecting a financial institution to operate the kiosk was known in the prior art before the effective filing date of the invention.
Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself- that is in the substitution of the ATM of the secondary reference(s) for the self-service kiosk of the primary reference.
Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
As per Claim 8, Coleman et al., discloses a method, comprising:
receiving, by a computing platform, the computing platform having at least one processor and memory, and from a first enterprise organization, a request to associate a plurality of kiosk with the first enterprise organization (pg.2, ¶ [0020] discusses The configuration information returned to the ATM CLA 134 specifies the information, such as, applicable airlines appropriate for a particular kiosk),
wherein the request to associate the plurality of kiosk includes information identifying the first enterprise organization and the plurality of kiosks and wherein the plurality of kiosks are located within a predefined distance of an event location2 (pg.2, ¶ [0021] discusses Configuration information includes selection of airline applications that are to be available on specific kiosks…kiosk at a hotel in Atlanta could be configured to allow guests to check in to airlines A, B, C, D, and E using self-service applications provided by the airlines A, B, C, D, and E….pg.2, ¶ [0017] discusses a kiosk can be tailored to provide functions, such as, passenger reservations, airline check in, hotel reservation and check in, rental car reservation and pickup and can be located in any environment that is conducive for its intended functions, such as, checking in passengers for airline flights…Figure 4, depicts where a plurality of kiosk are capable of being configured at a location);
retrieving, by the at least one processor and based on the information identifying the first enterprise organization, a kiosk configuration associated with the first enterprise organization (pg.3, ¶[0035] discusses In a second option, the XYZAirlines changes the application configuration to be installed on a remote kiosk to point to URL http://localhost/kioskcheckin:xxxx, where xxxx is an IP port number defined by the centralized data center 106);
initiating, by the at least one processor a communication session with the plurality of kiosk (pg.3, ¶ [0036] discusses a tunnel endpoint, such as tunnel endpoint 140, on a remote site kiosk, such as the remote kiosk 108, is set up to receive incoming requests from an airline application. The application running on the remote kiosk, such as self-service App 126 communicates with the tunnel endpoint 140 by opening an Internet protocol (IP) connection to "localhost". The tunnel endpoint 140 running on the remote kiosk 108, the local box, and is using Internet protocol to communication with the tunnel endpoint 140 rather than over a network);
generating, by the at least one processor, an instruction causing the plurality of kiosk to execute the kiosk configuration associated with the first enterprise organization (pg.5, ¶[0044] discusses The kiosk enabling process includes mapping of the name of the remote kiosk to a naming convention consistent with the airline network. By enabling the access, an airline application on the remote kiosk 108 would then be available for consumer use); and
transmitting, by the at least one processor and to the plurality of kiosk, the instruction causing the plurality of kiosk to execute the kiosk configuration associated with the first enterprise organization (pg.5, ¶ [0045] discusses Kiosks may be personalized to a configuration for XYZ Airline by associating the kiosks with an airport code and name mapping in the remote site environment),
wherein transmitting the instruction causes the plurality of kiosk to display information identifying the first enterprise organization and provide functionality identified by the first enterprise organization and included in the kiosk configuration associated with the first enterprise organization (pg.5, ¶ [0043] discusses the new kiosk or kiosks are then made available for use at the remote site).
Coleman et al. teaches a system and method for automatically providing remote self-service facilities administration over an Internet protocol. The self-service kiosk of Coleman et al., is capable of hosting multiple airlines on a single kiosk.
The sole difference between the primary reference and the claimed subject matter is that the primary reference does not disclose an ATM as claimed. The primary reference allows airlines to upload configuration data onto a single kiosk.
Ashino et al., discloses the trading device 1 is equipped with ATM software 11 of each of a plurality of financial institutions, and when a desired financial institution is selected by a customer, the ATM software 11 of that financial institution operates, and the trading device 1 operates. It provides the same functions as the ATM of the selected financial institution. In other words, the trading device 1 provides all the functions provided by the ATM of the selected financial institution (pg.3, lines 14-18).
The secondary references, Ashino et al., shows that an ATM is configured with ATM software of a plurality of financial institutions and a user is capable of selecting a financial institution to operate the kiosk was known in the prior art before the effective filing date of the invention.
Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself- that is in the substitution of the ATM of the secondary reference(s) for the self-service kiosk of the primary reference.
Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
As per Claim 9, Coleman et al. discloses the computing platform of claim 1, wherein the kiosk configuration associated with the first enterprise organization further includes one or more user interfaces for display (pg.2, ¶ [0022] discusses the self-service CLA 134 requests this information from the Config/Stats DB 139 via the central platform services application 136 to determine which application to run and display as available at specific times during the day).
The cited portion teaches where the kiosk is displaying airline application during a specific times during the day.
However, Coleman et al., fails to disclose an ATM.
Ashino teaches an ATM (pg.3, lines 18-21 discusses The trading device 1 is equipped with ATM software 11 of each of a plurality of financial institutions, and when a desired financial institution is selected by a customer, the ATM software 11 of that financial institution operates, and the trading device 1 operates. It provides the same functions as the ATM of the selected financial institution. In other words, the trading device 1 provides all the functions provided by the ATM of the selected financial institution).
Coleman et al. teaches a system and method for automatically providing remote self-service facilities administration over an Internet protocol. The self-service kiosk of Coleman et al., is capable of hosting multiple airlines on a single kiosk.
The sole difference between the primary reference and the claimed subject matter is that the primary reference does not disclose an ATM as claimed. The primary reference allows airlines to upload configuration data onto a single kiosk.
As per Claim 10, Coleman et al. discloses the method of claim 8, further including instructions that, when executed, cause the at least one processor to:
receive registration data from a plurality of enterprise organizations including at least the first enterprise organization (pg.3, ¶ [0023] discusses the self-service App 126, as supplied by an airline and by means of the secure information flow of the centralized data center 106),
the registration data including kiosk configurations for each enterprise organization of the plurality of enterprise organizations (pg.4, ¶ [0042] discusses the supervisor/administrator selects an appropriate configuration setting, such as, enabling an airline on the remote kiosk, setting the availability times, changing the name that the remote site self-service application knows the kiosk by, and the like; and
store the registration data (pg.5, ¶ [0046] discusses the supervisor/administrator may activate the save button 518 to save the information and return to a main menu).
As per Claim 11, Coleman et al., discloses the method of claim 8, wherein the first enterprise organization is different from an enterprise organization implementing the computing platform and that maintains the plurality of kiosk (pg.5, ¶ [0045] discusses a main group 505 for "National Hotels", a subgroup 506 for "Sunny Day Inn", a site name 507"Orlando Airport", a kiosk name 508"NHS-OIA-Kl", an airline city code 509 selected from a drop down menu, and an airline kiosk name conversion 510"MCONHSD1"…Figure 4, depicts multiple kiosk).
The Examiner is construing the Sunny Day Inn as an enterprise different from the airline implementing the kiosk.
As per Claim 14, Coleman et al., discloses the method of claim 8, further including instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the computing platform to:
after transmitting, to the plurality of kiosk, the instruction causing the plurality of kiosk to execute the kiosk configuration associated with the first enterprise organization (pg.5, ¶ [0045] discusses Kiosks may be personalized to a configuration for XYZ Airline by associating the kiosks with an airport code and name mapping in the remote site environment);
receiving, by the at least one processor and from a second enterprise organization different from the first enterprise organization, a request to associate at least a first kiosk with the second enterprise organization (pg.5, ¶ [045] discusses For each airline that uses a kiosk, the configuration information for that kiosk is set up specific for that airline),
wherein the request to associate the at least the first kiosk includes information identifying the second enterprise organization and the at least the first kiosk (Figure 5, depicts Kiosk Configuration 500, depicts XYZ Airline, which allows each airline to configure settings specific to their airline, Kiosk Name 508);
retrieving, by the at least on processor and based on the information identifying the second enterprise organization, a kiosk configuration associated with the second enterprise organization (pg.3, ¶[0035] discusses In a second option, the XYZAirlines changes the application configuration to be installed on a remote kiosk to point to URL http://localhost/kioskcheckin:xxxx, where xxxx is an IP port number defined by the centralized data center 106);
generating, by the at least one processor, an instruction causing the at least the first kiosk to execute the kiosk configuration associated with the second enterprise organization (pg.5, ¶[0044] discusses The kiosk enabling process includes mapping of the name of the remote kiosk to a naming convention consistent with the airline network. By enabling the access, an airline application on the remote kiosk 108 would then be available for consumer use); and
transmitting, by the at least one processor and to the at least the first kiosk, the instruction causing the first kiosk to execute the kiosk configuration associated with the second enterprise organization (pg.5, ¶ [0045] discusses Kiosks may be personalized to a configuration for XYZ Airline by associating the kiosks with an airport code and name mapping in the remote site environment),
wherein transmitting the instruction causes the at least the first kiosk to display information identifying the second enterprise organization and provide functionality identified by the second enterprise organization and included in the kiosk configuration associated with the second enterprise organization (pg.5, ¶ [0043] discusses the new kiosk or kiosks are then made available for use at the remote site).
Coleman et al. teaches a system and method for automatically providing remote self-service facilities administration over an Internet protocol. The self-service kiosk of Coleman et al., is capable of hosting multiple airlines on a single kiosk.
The sole difference between the primary reference and the claimed subject matter is that the primary reference does not disclose an ATM as claimed. The primary reference allows airlines to upload configuration data onto a single kiosk.
Ashino et al., discloses the trading device 1 is equipped with ATM software 11 of each of a plurality of financial institutions, and when a desired financial institution is selected by a customer, the ATM software 11 of that financial institution operates, and the trading device 1 operates. It provides the same functions as the ATM of the selected financial institution. In other words, the trading device 1 provides all the functions provided by the ATM of the selected financial institution (pg.3, lines 14-18).
The secondary references, Ashino et al., shows that an ATM is configured with ATM software of a plurality of financial institutions and a user is capable of selecting a financial institution to operate the kiosk was known in the prior art before the effective filing date of the invention.
Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself- that is in the substitution of the ATM of the secondary reference(s) for the self-service kiosk of the primary reference.
Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
As per Claim 15, Coleman et al., discloses the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing instructions that, when executed by a computing platform comprising at least one processor, memory, and a communication interface, cause the computing platform to:
receive, from a first enterprise organization, a request to associate a plurality of kiosk with the first enterprise organization (pg.2, ¶ [0020] discusses The configuration information returned to the self-service CLA 134 specifies the information, such as, applicable airlines appropriate for a particular kiosk),
wherein the request to associate the first kiosk includes information identifying the first enterprise organization and the plurality of kiosks and wherein the plurality of kiosks are located within a predefined distance of an event location3 (pg.2, ¶ [0021] discusses Configuration information includes selection of airline applications that are to be available on specific kiosks…kiosk at a hotel in Atlanta could be configured to allow guests to check in to airlines A, B, C, D, and E using self-service applications provided by the airlines A, B, C, D, and E….pg.2, ¶ [0017] discusses a kiosk can be tailored to provide functions, such as, passenger reservations, airline check in, hotel reservation and check in, rental car reservation and pickup and can be located in any environment that is conducive for its intended functions, such as, checking in passengers for airline flights…Figure 4, depicts where a plurality of kiosk are capable of being configured at a location);
retrieve, based on the information identifying the first enterprise organization, a kiosk configuration associated with the first enterprise organization (pg.3, ¶[0035] discusses In a second option, the XYZAirlines changes the application configuration to be installed on a remote kiosk to point to URL http://localhost/kioskcheckin:xxxx, where xxxx is an IP port number defined by the centralized data center 106);
initiate a communication session with the plurality of kiosk (pg.3, ¶ [0036] discusses a tunnel endpoint, such as tunnel endpoint 140, on a remote site kiosk, such as the remote kiosk 108, is set up to receive incoming requests from an airline application. The application running on the remote kiosk, such as kiosk App 126 communicates with the tunnel endpoint 140 by opening an Internet protocol (IP) connection to "localhost". The tunnel endpoint 140 running on the remote kiosk 108, the local box, and is using Internet protocol to communication with the tunnel endpoint 140 rather than over a network);
generate an instruction causing the plurality of kiosk to execute the kiosk configuration associated with the first enterprise organization (pg.5, ¶[0044] discusses The kiosk enabling process includes mapping of the name of the remote kiosk to a naming convention consistent with the airline network. By enabling the access, an airline application on the remote kiosk 108 would then be available for consumer use); and
transmit, to the plurality of kiosk, the instruction causing the plurality of kiosk to execute the kiosk configuration associated with the first enterprise organization (pg.5, ¶ [0045] discusses Kiosks may be personalized to a configuration for XYZ Airline by associating the kiosks with an airport code and name mapping in the remote site environment),
wherein transmitting the instruction causes the plurality of kiosk to display information identifying the first enterprise organization and provide functionality identified by the first enterprise organization and included in the kiosk configuration associated with the first enterprise organization (pg.5, ¶ [0043] discusses the new kiosk or kiosks are then made available for use at the remote site).
Coleman et al. discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention which appear to be the same as or an obvious variant of the system and method as claimed.
However, Coleman et al., fails to disclose an ATM and wherein the functionality identified by the first enterprise organization includes functionality associated with receiving and dispensing funds.
Ashino et al. teaches an ATM (pg.3, lines 14-18 discloses the trading device 1 is equipped with ATM software 11 of each of a plurality of financial institutions, and when a desired financial institution is selected by a customer, the ATM software 11 of that financial institution operates, and the trading device 1 operates. It provides the same functions as the ATM of the selected financial institution. In other words, the trading device 1 provides all the functions provided by the ATM of the selected financial institution), and
wherein the functionality identified by the first enterprise organization includes functionality associated with receiving and dispensing funds (pg.16, lines 32-34 discusses when the transaction device 1 is equipped with the software 11a of another industry, the user can make deposits and withdrawals in the transaction device 1 and use the system of another industry).
Ashino et al., shows that the use of a software from another industry on an ATM that allows a user to make deposits and withdrawals as though the user was operating on a customer’s Bank ATM, was known in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention.
Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in
separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself- that is in the substitution of the ATM of Ashino et al. for the self-service kiosk of Coleman et al.
Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
As per Claim 16, Coleman et al. discloses the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 15, wherein the kiosk configuration associated with the first enterprise organization further includes one or more user interfaces for display (pg.2, ¶ [0022] discusses the self-service CLA 134 requests this information from the Config/Stats DB 139 via the central platform services application 136 to determine which application to run and display as available at specific times during the day).
The cited portion teaches where the kiosk is displaying airline application during a specific times during the day.
However, Coleman fails to explicitly state an ATM.
Ashino et al. teaches an ATM (pg.3, lines 14-18 discloses the trading device 1 is equipped with ATM software 11 of each of a plurality of financial institutions, and when a desired financial institution is selected by a customer, the ATM software 11 of that financial institution operates, and the trading device 1 operates. It provides the same functions as the ATM of the selected financial institution. In other words, the trading device 1 provides all the functions provided by the ATM of the selected financial institution).
Ashino et al., shows that the use of a software from another industry on an ATM that allows a user to make deposits and withdrawals as though the user was operating on a customer’s Bank ATM, was known in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention.
Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in
separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself- that is in the substitution of the ATM of Ashino et al. for the self-service kiosk of Coleman et al.
Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
As per Claim 17, Coleman et al. discloses the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 15, further including instructions that, when executed, cause the at least one processor to:
receive registration data from a plurality of enterprise organizations including at least the first enterprise organization (pg.3, ¶ [0023] discusses the self-service App 126, as supplied by an airline and by means of the secure information flow of the centralized data center 106),
the registration data including kiosk configurations for each enterprise organization of the plurality of enterprise organizations (pg.4, ¶ [0042] discusses the supervisor/administrator selects an appropriate configuration setting, such as, enabling an airline on the remote kiosk, setting the availability times, changing the name that the remote site self-service application knows the kiosk by, and the like; and
store the registration data (pg.5, ¶ [0046] discusses the supervisor/administrator may activate the save button 518 to save the information and return to a main menu).
As per Claim 18, Coleman et al., discloses the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 15, wherein the first enterprise organization is different from an enterprise organization implementing the computing platform and that maintains the plurality of kiosk (pg.5, ¶ [0045] discusses a main group 505 for "National Hotels", a subgroup 506 for "Sunny Day Inn", a site name 507"Orlando Airport", a kiosk name 508"NHS-OIA-Kl", an airline city code 509 selected from a drop down menu, and an airline kiosk name conversion 510"MCONHSD1").
The Examiner is construing the Sunny Day Inn as an enterprise different from the airline implementing the kiosk.
However, Coleman fails to disclose an ATM.
Ashino et al. teaches an ATM (pg.3, lines 14-18 discloses the trading device 1 is equipped with ATM software 11 of each of a plurality of financial institutions, and when a desired financial institution is selected by a customer, the ATM software 11 of that financial institution operates, and the trading device 1 operates. It provides the same functions as the ATM of the selected financial institution. In other words, the trading device 1 provides all the functions provided by the ATM of the selected financial institution).
Ashino et al., shows that the use of a software from another industry on an ATM that allows a user to make deposits and withdrawals as though the user was operating on a customer’s Bank ATM, was known in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention.
Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in
separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself- that is in the substitution of the ATM of Ashino et al. for the self-service kiosk of Coleman et al.
Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
As per Claim 21, Coleman et al., discloses the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 15, further including instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the computing platform to:
after transmitting, to the plurality of kiosk, the instruction causing the plurality of kiosk to execute the kiosk configuration associated with the first enterprise organization (pg.5, ¶ [0045] discusses Kiosks may be personalized to a configuration for XYZ Airline by associating the kiosks with an airport code and name mapping in the remote site environment);
receive, from a second enterprise organization different from the first enterprise organization, a request to associate the at least a first kiosk with the second enterprise organization (pg.5, ¶ [045] discusses For each airline that uses a kiosk, the configuration information for that kiosk is set up specific for that airline),
wherein the request to associate the at least the first kiosk includes information identifying the second enterprise organization and the at least the first kiosk (Figure 5, depicts Kiosk Configuration 500, depicts XYZ Airline, which allows each airline to configure settings specific to their airline, Kiosk Name 508);
retrieve, based on the information identifying the second enterprise organization, a kiosk configuration associated with the second enterprise organization (pg.3, ¶[0035] discusses In a second option, the XYZAirlines changes the application configuration to be installed on a remote kiosk to point to URL http://localhost/kioskcheckin:xxxx, where xxxx is an IP port number defined by the centralized data center 106);
generate an instruction causing the at least the first kiosk of the plurality kiosk to execute the kiosk configuration associated with the second enterprise organization (pg.5, ¶[0044] discusses The kiosk enabling process includes mapping of the name of the remote kiosk to a naming convention consistent with the airline network. By enabling the access, an airline application on the remote kiosk 108 would then be available for consumer use); and
transmit, to the at least the first kiosk, the instruction causing the at least the first kiosk to execute the kiosk configuration associated with the second enterprise organization (pg.5, ¶ [0045] discusses Kiosks may be personalized to a configuration for XYZ Airline by associating the kiosks with an airport code and name mapping in the remote site environment),
wherein transmitting the instruction causes the at least the first kiosk to display information identifying the second enterprise organization and provide functionality identified by the second enterprise organization and included in the kiosk configuration associated with the second enterprise organization (pg.5, ¶ [0043] discusses the new kiosk or kiosks are then made available for use at the remote site).
Coleman et al. teaches a system and method for automatically providing remote self-service facilities administration over an Internet protocol. The self-service kiosk of Coleman et al., is capable of hosting multiple airlines on a single kiosk.
The sole difference between the primary reference and the claimed subject matter is that the primary reference does not disclose an ATM as claimed. The primary reference allows airlines to upload configuration data onto a single kiosk.
Ashino et al., discloses the trading device 1 is equipped with ATM software 11 of each of a plurality of financial institutions, and when a desired financial institution is selected by a customer, the ATM software 11 of that financial institution operates, and the trading device 1 operates. It provides the same functions as the ATM of the selected financial institution. In other words, the trading device 1 provides all the functions provided by the ATM of the selected financial institution (pg.3, lines 14-18).
The secondary references, Ashino et al., shows that an ATM is configured with ATM software of a plurality of financial institutions and a user is capable of selecting a financial institution to operate the kiosk was known in the prior art before the effective filing date of the invention.
Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself- that is in the substitution of the ATM of the secondary reference(s) for the self-service kiosk of the primary reference.
Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
Claim(s) 5, 12 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Coleman et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication 2008/0010375 in view of Ashino et al., WIPO WO2021/192375 further in view of Guntupalli et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication 2023/0074782.
As per Claim 5, Coleman et al. discloses the computing platform of claim 1, further including instructions that, when executed, cause the computing platform to:
receive, from a first kiosk of the plurality of ATMs, a user request to process a transaction (pg.3, ¶ [0024] discusses Find a reservation by credit card, guest name on a credit card and a destination city, frequent flyer card/number, and confirmation number);
initiate a communication session with a computing system of the first enterprise organization (pg.3, ¶ [0032] discusses the self-service App 126, in the course of processing the transaction, will communicate with a production server in the airline environment, outside of the airline environment 104, communication is done over the Internet 122 through the centralized data enter 106);
transmit the request to process the transaction to the computing system of the first enterprise organization for processing (pg.3, ¶ [0032] discusses The self-service App 126 communicates with a tunnel endpoint 140 running locally on the remote kiosk 108. This tunnel endpoint 140 emulates interactions with the airline production servers 112. The
receive, from the computing system of the first enterprise organization, response data indicating whether the request to process the transaction was approved (pg.4, g [0039] discusses Requests made to the airline production servers 112 generally result in some response).
Ashino et al., discloses the trading device 1 is equipped with ATM software 11 of each of a plurality of financial institutions, and when a desired financial institution is selected by a customer, the ATM software 11 of that financial institution operates, and the trading device 1 operates. It provides the same functions as the ATM of the selected financial institution. In other words, the trading device 1 provides all the functions provided by the ATM of the selected financial institution (pg.3, lines 14-18).
The secondary references, Ashino et al., shows that an ATM is configured with ATM software of a plurality of financial institutions and a user is capable of selecting a financial institution to operate the kiosk was known in the prior art before the effective filing date of the invention.
Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself- that is in the substitution of the ATM of the secondary reference(s) for the self-service kiosk of the primary reference.
Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
However, the Coleman et al.-Ashino et al. combination fails to disclose generate an instruction based on the response data; and
transmit the generated instruction to the first ATM kiosk, wherein transmitting the generated instruction to the first ATM kiosk causes the first self- service kiosk to approve or deny the request to process the transaction.
Guntupalli et al. teaches generate an instruction based on the response data (pg.4, ¶ [0041] discusses the host 14 then applies an acceptance criterion (step 114). In this example, the acceptance criterion comprises (i) comparing the password entered in field 58 with the password registered for that username to ensure that they match, and (ii) confirming that the customer has sufficient funds in his/her account to meet the withdrawal request (in this example, fifty dollars).; and
transmit the generated instruction to the first ATM kiosk, wherein transmitting the generated instruction to the first ATM kiosk causes the first self- service kiosk to approve or deny the request to process the transaction (pg.3, ¶ [0043] discusses If the acceptance criterion is not fulfilled, then the host 14 denies the request (step 116) and sends a message to the customer (for example, by email, text message, and/or by placing a message for that customer on the customer's Web page 50) to alert the customer to this failed transaction request (step 118).…¶ [0043] If the acceptance criterion is fulfilled, then the host 14 transmits a pending transaction message to the ATM identified in the ATM identification field 52 (in this example, ATM 12b) (step 120). The pending transaction message comprises a transaction identification field, a customer verification field, a transaction amount field, and a lifetime field).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the ability to approve or deny transactions based on a received response as in the improvement discussed in Guntupalli et al., in the system executing the method of the Coleman et al.-Ashino et al. combination. As in Guntupalli et al., it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to send an approval or denial response to self-service terminals with the predicted result of remotely approving and denying a transaction as needed in the Coleman et al.-Ashino et al. combination.
As per Claim 12, Coleman et al. discloses the method of claim 8, further including instructions that, when executed, cause the computing platform to:
receive, from a first kiosk of the plurality of ATMs, a user request to process a transaction (pg.3, ¶ [0024] discusses Find a reservation by credit card, guest name on a credit card and a destination city, frequent flyer card/number, and confirmation number);
initiate a communication session with a computing system of the first enterprise organization (pg.3, ¶ [0032] discusses the self-service App 126, in the course of processing the transaction, will communicate with a production server in the airline environment, outside of the airline environment 104, communication is done over the Internet 122 through the centralized data enter 106);
transmit the request to process the transaction to the computing system of the first enterprise organization for processing (pg.3, ¶ [0032] discusses The
receive, from the computing system of the first enterprise organization, response data indicating whether the request to process the transaction was approved (pg.4, g [0039] discusses Requests made to the airline production servers 112 generally result in some response).
Ashino et al., discloses the trading device 1 is equipped with ATM software 11 of each of a plurality of financial institutions, and when a desired financial institution is selected by a customer, the ATM software 11 of that financial institution operates, and the trading device 1 operates. It provides the same functions as the ATM of the selected financial institution. In other words, the trading device 1 provides all the functions provided by the ATM of the selected financial institution (pg.3, lines 14-18).
The secondary references, Ashino et al., shows that an ATM is configured with ATM software of a plurality of financial institutions and a user is capable of selecting a financial institution to operate the kiosk was known in the prior art before the effective filing date of the invention.
Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself- that is in the substitution of the ATM of the secondary reference(s) for the self-service kiosk of the primary reference.
Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
However, the Coleman et al.-Ashino et al. combination, fails to disclose generate an instruction based on the response data; and
transmit the generated instruction to the first ATM kiosk, wherein transmitting the generated instruction to the first ATM kiosk causes the first self- service kiosk to approve or deny the request to process the transaction.
Guntupalli et al. teaches generate an instruction based on the response data (pg.4, ¶ [0041] discusses the host 14 then applies an acceptance criterion (step 114). In this example, the acceptance criterion comprises (i) comparing the password entered in field 58 with the password registered for that username to ensure that they match, and (ii) confirming that the customer has sufficient funds in his/her account to meet the withdrawal request (in this example, fifty dollars).; and
transmit the generated instruction to the first ATM kiosk, wherein transmitting the generated instruction to the first ATM kiosk causes the first self- service kiosk to approve or deny the request to process the transaction (pg.3, ¶ [0043] discusses If the acceptance criterion is not fulfilled, then the host 14 denies the request (step 116) and sends a message to the customer (for example, by email, text message, and/or by placing a message for that customer on the customer's Web page 50) to alert the customer to this failed transaction request (step 118).…¶ [0043] If the acceptance criterion is fulfilled, then the host 14 transmits a pending transaction message to the ATM identified in the ATM identification field 52 (in this example, ATM 12b) (step 120). The pending transaction message comprises a transaction identification field, a customer verification field, a transaction amount field, and a lifetime field).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the ability to approve or deny transactions based on a received response as in the improvement discussed in Guntupalli et al., in the system executing the method of the Coleman-Ashino combination. As in Guntupalli et al., it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to send an approval or denial response to self-service terminals with the predicted result of remotely approving and denying a transaction as needed in the Coleman-Ashino combination.
As per Claim 19, Coleman et al. discloses the one or mor non-transitory computer readable media of claim 15, further including instructions that, when executed, cause the computing platform to:
receive, from a first kiosk of the plurality of ATMs, a user request to process a transaction (pg.3, ¶ [0024] discusses Find a reservation by credit card, guest name on a credit card and a destination city, frequent flyer card/number, and confirmation number);
initiate a communication session with a computing system of the first enterprise organization (pg.3, ¶ [0032] discusses the self-service App 126, in the course of processing the transaction, will communicate with a production server in the airline environment, outside of the airline environment 104, communication is done over the Internet 122 through the centralized data enter 106);
transmit the request to process the transaction to the computing system of the first enterprise organization for processing (pg.3, ¶ [0032] discusses The self-service App 126 communicates with a tunnel endpoint 140 running locally on the remote kiosk 108. This tunnel endpoint 140 emulates interactions with the airline production servers 112. The
receive, from the computing system of the first enterprise organization, response data indicating whether the request to process the transaction was approved (pg.4, g [0039] discusses Requests made to the airline production servers 112 generally result in some response).
Ashino et al., discloses the trading device 1 is equipped with ATM software 11 of each of a plurality of financial institutions, and when a desired financial institution is selected by a customer, the ATM software 11 of that financial institution operates, and the trading device 1 operates. It provides the same functions as the ATM of the selected financial institution. In other words, the trading device 1 provides all the functions provided by the ATM of the selected financial institution (pg.3, lines 14-18).
The secondary references, Ashino et al., shows that an ATM is configured with ATM software of a plurality of financial institutions and a user is capable of selecting a financial institution to operate the kiosk was known in the prior art before the effective filing date of the invention.
Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself- that is in the substitution of the ATM of the secondary reference(s) for the self-service kiosk of the primary reference.
Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
However, Coleman et al., fails to disclose generate an instruction based on the response data; and
transmit the generated instruction to the first ATM kiosk, wherein transmitting the generated instruction to the first ATM kiosk causes the first self- service kiosk to approve or deny the request to process the transaction.
Guntupalli et al. teaches generate an instruction based on the response data (pg.4, ¶ [0041] discusses the host 14 then applies an acceptance criterion (step 114). In this example, the acceptance criterion comprises (i) comparing the password entered in field 58 with the password registered for that username to ensure that they match, and (ii) confirming that the customer has sufficient funds in his/her account to meet the withdrawal request (in this example, fifty dollars).; and
transmit the generated instruction to the first ATM kiosk, wherein transmitting the generated instruction to the first ATM kiosk causes the first self- service kiosk to approve or deny the request to process the transaction (pg.3, ¶ [0043] discusses If the acceptance criterion is not fulfilled, then the host 14 denies the request (step 116) and sends a message to the customer (for example, by email, text message, and/or by placing a message for that customer on the customer's Web page 50) to alert the customer to this failed transaction request (step 118).…¶ [0043] If the acceptance criterion is fulfilled, then the host 14 transmits a pending transaction message to the ATM identified in the ATM identification field 52 (in this example, ATM 12b) (step 120). The pending transaction message comprises a transaction identification field, a customer verification field, a transaction amount field, and a lifetime field).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the ability to approve or deny transactions based on a received response as in the improvement discussed in Guntupalli et al., in the system executing the method of the Coleman-Ashino combination. As in Guntupalli et al., it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to send an approval or denial response to self-service terminals with the predicted result of remotely approving and denying a transaction as needed in the Coleman-Ashino combination.
Claim(s) 6, 13 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Coleman et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication 2008/0010375 in view of Ashino et al., WIPO WO2021/192375 further in view of Tendulkar, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2023/0074782.
As per Claim 6, Coleman et al. discloses wherein transmitting to the plurality of kiosk, the instruction causing the plurality of kiosk to execute kiosk configuration associated with the first enterprise organization (pg.5, ¶ [0045] discusses Kiosks may be personalized to a configuration for XYZ Airline by associating the kiosks with an airport code and name mapping in the remote site environment).
However, the Coleman et al.-Ashino et al. combination fails to disclose a platform further including instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the computing platform to:
generate, based on execution of a machine learning model, at least one recommendation,
transmitting, to the plurality of kiosk, the generated at least one recommendation, and
wherein transmitting the generated at least one recommendation causes the plurality of kiosk to display the generated at least one recommendation.
Tendulkar et al. teaches generate, based on execution of a machine learning model, at least one recommendation (pg.11, ¶ [0213] discusses the cosmetic matching system employs machine learning techniques at a color adjustment stage and a recommended product matches stage),
transmitting, to the plurality of kiosk, the generated at least one recommendation, (pg.11, ¶ [0220] discusses Recommended product matches stage. After a customer has determined their shade preference (whether using a manual shade adjustment, using machine learning, or otherwise), the cosmetic matching system provides a list of cosmetic products the customer may be interested in, and
wherein transmitting the generated at least one recommendation causes the plurality of kiosk to display the generated at least one recommendation (Figure 14X, depicts recommended cosmetic products).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have a machine learning model to generate recommendations to assist customers interacting with a communal kiosk as in the improvement discussed in Tendulkar et al. in the system executing the method of the Coleman et al.-Ashino et al. combination. As in Tendulkar et al., it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize machine learning models to generate recommendations to customers using communal kiosk with the predicted result of assisting customers during an interaction as needed in the Coleman et al.-Ashino et al. combination.
As per Claim 13, Coleman et al. discloses wherein transmitting to the plurality of kiosk, the instruction causing the plurality of kiosk to execute kiosk configuration associated with the first enterprise organization (pg.5, ¶ [0045] discusses Kiosks may be personalized to a configuration for XYZ Airline by associating the kiosks with an airport code and name mapping in the remote site environment).
However, the Coleman et al.-Ashino et al. combination fails to disclose a platform further including instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the computing platform to:
generate, based on execution of a machine learning model, at least one recommendation,
transmitting, to the first ATM kiosk, the generated at least one recommendation, and
wherein transmitting the generated at least one recommendation causes the first ATM kiosk to display the generated at least one recommendation.
Tendulkar et al. teaches generate, based on execution of a machine learning model, at least one recommendation (pg.11, ¶ [0213] discusses the cosmetic matching system employs machine learning techniques at a color adjustment stage and a recommended product matches stage),
transmitting, to the plurality of kiosk, the generated at least one recommendation, (pg.11, ¶ [0220] discusses Recommended product matches stage. After a customer has determined their shade preference (whether using a manual shade adjustment, using machine learning, or otherwise), the cosmetic matching system provides a list of cosmetic products the customer may be interested in, and
wherein transmitting the generated at least one recommendation causes the plurality of kiosk to display the generated at least one recommendation (Figure 14X, depicts recommended cosmetic products).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have a machine learning model to generate recommendations to assist customers interacting with a communal kiosk as in the improvement discussed in Tendulkar et al. in the system executing the method of the Coleman et al.-Ashino et al. combination. As in Tendulkar et al., it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize machine learning models to generate recommendations to customers using communal kiosk with the predicted result of assisting customers during an interaction as needed in the Coleman et al.-Ashino et al. combination.
As per Claim 20, Coleman et al. discloses wherein transmitting to the plurality of kiosk, the instruction causing the plurality of kiosk to execute kiosk configuration associated with the first enterprise organization (pg.5, ¶ [0045] discusses Kiosks may be personalized to a configuration for XYZ Airline by associating the kiosks with an airport code and name mapping in the remote site environment).
However, the Coleman et al.-Ashino et al. combination fails to disclose a platform further including instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the computing platform to:
generate, based on execution of a machine learning model, at least one recommendation,
transmitting, to the plurality of kiosk, the generated at least one recommendation, and
wherein transmitting the generated at least one recommendation causes the first
Tendulkar et al. teaches generate, based on execution of a machine learning model, at least one recommendation (pg.11, ¶ [0213] discusses the cosmetic matching system employs machine learning techniques at a color adjustment stage and a recommended product matches stage),
transmitting, to the plurality of kiosk, the generated at least one recommendation (pg.11, ¶ [0220] discusses Recommended product matches stage. After a customer has determined their shade preference (whether using a manual shade adjustment, using machine learning, or otherwise), the cosmetic matching system provides a list of cosmetic products the customer may be interested in, and
wherein transmitting the generated at least one recommendation causes the plurality of kiosk to display the generated at least one recommendation (Figure 14X, depicts recommended cosmetic products).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have a machine learning model to generate recommendations to assist customers interacting with a communal kiosk as in the improvement discussed in Tendulkar et al. in the system executing the method of the Coleman et al.-Ashino et al. combination. As in Tendulkar et al., it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize machine learning models to generate recommendations to customers using communal kiosk with the predicted result of assisting customers during an interaction as needed in the Coleman et al.-Ashino et al. combination.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Korala et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication 2022/0114007 discusses a hypervisor or other virtual machine host, operable to provide a virtual machine; a guest operating system that is hosted within the virtual machine. Abstract
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ASHFORD S HAYLES whose telephone number is (571)270-5106. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6AM-4PM with Flex.
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, Fahd Obeid can be reached at 5712703324. 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.
/ASHFORD S HAYLES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627
1 Coleman discloses the claimed invention except for a predefined distance from an event. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to provide ATMs within proximity of an event, since applicant has not disclosed that ATMs located a predefined distance from an event solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally well with locating kiosks within an airport or hotel lobby for a flight.
2 Coleman discloses the claimed invention except for a predefined distance from an event. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to provide ATMs within proximity of an event, since applicant has not disclosed that ATMs located a predefined distance from an event solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally well with locating kiosks within an airport or hotel lobby for a flight.
3 Coleman discloses the claimed invention except for a predefined distance from an event. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to provide ATMs within proximity of an event, since applicant has not disclosed that ATMs located a predefined distance from an event solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally well with locating kiosks within an airport or hotel lobby for a flight.
Prosecution Insights