DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 04/25/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The previously submitted 35 USC 112 1st have been withdrawn based on Applicant’s amendments.
Some of the previously presented 35 USC 2nd have been withdrawn due to Applicant’s amendments.
Status of the Application
This is a Non-Final action in response to the claims and remarks as submitted on 04/25/2026.
Claims 1, 3, 11, 15, 16, 19-22 are amended.
Claims 1, 3-4, 6-22 are pending and examined herein.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 3-4, and 6-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The newly added limitations in the independent claims disclose new matter not disclose on the originally filled specification.
Newly amended claims 1, 11 and 19 discloses the newly added limitations “storing, as the authentication password in the storage, the set password accepted in association with the equipment identification information of the rental equipment, such that the storage associates each of the issue password and the set password with respective equipment identification information in a usage reservation information table”
However, nowhere in the specification it is disclosed that storage associates each of the issue password and the set password with respective equipment identification information in a usage reservation information table. The originally filled specification does disclose storing two different types of passwords, see Figures 2-4 and related paragraphs. However, there is no disclosure in the specification related to the storage associating each of the issue password and the set password with respective equipment identification in a usage reservation information table, this is because the system, for each equipment, only allows for one reservation at a time and the reservations can be made either with a server generated password or with an input password from the user different than the server password. For these reasons the claims are rejected for containing new matter not disclosed on the originally filled specification and examined as best understood.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 1, 3-4, and 6-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Amended claims 1, 11 and 19 discloses the limitation “determining whether or not the rental equipment is usable for selection based on a situation of the usage reservation when the issue password has not been previously issued in connection with the usage reservation”, however the previous limitation requires “storing, as an authentication password, an issue password issued in accordance with a usage reservation of a rental equipment” Therefore, it is unclear how the system would be able to make such a determination of whether or not the rental equipment is usable for selection based on a situation of the usage reservation when the issue password has not been previously issued, if the previous claimed limitation requires that an issue password issued in accordance with a usage reservation of a rental equipment is stored as an authentication password. Revision is requested.
Amended claim 1 discloses the limitations “accepting, as the authentication password, a set password to be set and input from the user when it is determined that the rental equipment is usable and a timing when the usage reservation was accepted is included in the desired usage period, the set password is different from any password generated or transmitted by the server… and storing, as the authentication password in the storage, the set password accepted in association with the equipment identification information of the rental equipment, such that the storage associates each of the issue password and the set password with respective equipment identification information in a usage reservation information table” It is unclear if the Applicant is claiming an override function since the system previously required to “storing, as an authentication password, an issue password”. It is unclear if the system stores both passwords as authentication passwords, if this is an override function to the already stored authentication password or if the system requires two different authentication passwords. Furthermore the claim is found indefinite since the limitations are grammatically and structurally unclear and hard to understand, particularly with respect to the conditional relationships, and therefore require revision for clarity.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the usage reservation was accepted". The limitation is written in past tense making the claim indefinite. The limitation could be rewritten as “a timing of acceptance of the usage reservation is included…”.
Amended claim 1 discloses the limitation “determining whether or not the rental equipment is usable for selection based on…” however the previous limitations requires for “receiving an input password input by a user from the rental equipment when the rental equipment is used”. Therefore, it is unclear how the system would be able to make such a determination of whether or not the rental equipment is usable, if the previous claimed limitation requires that the rental equipment is used. Revision is requested.
Amended claim 1 discloses “the rental equipment is stored in the storage in the usage reservation information table of the storage”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if the system requires two different storages or if this is a typographical error. Revision is requested.
Amended claim 11 discloses the limitations “accepting, as the authentication password, a set password to input from the rental equipment by the user when it is determined that the rental equipment is usable for selection, and a timing when the usage reservation was accepted is included in the desired usage period, and when the rental equipment is rented, the set password is different from any password generated or transmitted by the server.” The claim is found indefinite since the limitations are grammatically and structurally unclear and hard to understand, particularly with respect to the conditional relationships, and therefore require revision for clarity.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "the usage reservation was accepted" in line 13. The limitation is written in past tense making the claim indefinite. The limitation could be rewritten as “a timing of acceptance of the usage reservation is included…”.
Amended claim 11 discloses the limitation “determining whether or not the rental equipment is usable for selection based on…” however the previous limitations requires for “receiving an input password input by the and the rental equipment identification from the rental equipment when the rental equipment is used”. Therefore, it is unclear how the system would be able to make such a determination of whether or not the rental equipment is usable, if the previous claimed limitation requires that the rental equipment is used. Revision is requested.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "the storage in the usage reservation information table of the storage". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if the system requires two different storages or if this is a typographical error. Revision is requested.
Claims 13 and 15-16 discloses the limitation “the authentication password”, however it is unclear if the Applicant is referring to “the acquired or accepted authentication password” as recited in claim 11, from which clams 13 and 15-16 depends. It is unclear to which of the passwords Applicant is referring to.
Amended claim 19 discloses the limitations “accept, as the authentication password, a set password to be input from the rental equipment by a user when it is determined that the rental equipment is usable for selection and a timing when the usage reservation was accepted is included in the desired usage period, and when the rental equipment is rented, the set password is different from any password generated or transmitted by the server. The claim is found indefinite since the limitations are grammatically and structurally unclear and hard to understand, particularly with respect to the conditional relationships, and therefore require revision for clarity.
Claim 19 recites the limitation "the usage reservation was accepted". The limitation is written in past tense making the claim indefinite. The limitation could be rewritten as “a timing of acceptance of the usage reservation is included…”.
Amended claim 19 discloses the limitation “determining whether or not the rental equipment is usable for selection based on…” however the previous limitations requires for “receive an input password input by a user and the equipment identification information from the rental equipment when the rental equipment is used”. Therefore, it is unclear how the system would be able to make such a determination of whether or not the rental equipment is usable, if the previous claimed limitation requires that the rental equipment is used. Revision is requested.
Amended claim 1 discloses “the equipment identification information is stored in the storage in the usage reservation information table of the storage”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if the system requires two different storages or if this is a typographical error. Revision is requested.
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, 3-4, and 6-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claims are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
With respect to Step 1 of the eligibility inquiry (as explained in MPEP 2106), it is first noted that the claims are directed to at least one potentially eligible category of subject matter (i.e., process and machine, respectively). Thus, Step 1 of the Subject Matter Eligibility test for claims 1-19 is satisfied. For expedited prosecution purposes claim 19 is analyzed as being directed to at least one eligible category of subject matter.
With respect to Step 2A Prong One, it is next noted that the claims recite an abstract idea that falls under the “Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity” and “Mental Processes” group within the enumerated groupings of abstract ideas set forth in the MPEP 2106 since the claims set forth steps that recite commercial interactions (business relations) and concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion). Claims 1, 11 and 19 recites the abstract idea of renting equipment (see paragraph 002).
With respect to claim 1, the idea is described by the following claim steps:
storing, as an authentication password, an issue password issued in accordance with a usage reservation of a rental equipment having been notified from a client terminal of a user in a storage in association with equipment identification information of the rental equipment;
determining whether or not the rental equipment is usable for selection based on a situation of the usage reservation when the issue password has not been previously issued in connection with the usage reservation and the usage reservation is made via the rental equipment or a control terminal of the rental equipment, and when a desired usage period in which a use of the rental equipment is desired has been accepted;
accepting, as the authentication password, a set password to be set and input from the user when it is determined that the rental equipment is usable and a timing when the usage reservation was accepted is included in the desired usage period, the set password is different from any password generated or transmitted by the server;
storing, as the authentication password in the storage, the set password accepted in association with the equipment identification information of the rental equipment, such that the storage associated each of the issue password and the set password with respective equipment identification information in a usage reservation information table;
receiving an input password input by a user from the rental equipment when the rental equipment is used; and
determining whether or not the rental equipment is usable for selection based on whether or not a combination of the received input password and the equipment identification information of the rental equipment is stored in the storage in the usage reservation information table of the storage.
This idea falls within the certain methods of organizing human activity grouping of abstract ideas because it is directed towards business relations such that as required when renting equipment. The noted abstract idea is also directed to concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) such as that required during determination of whether or not a combination of received input and equipment information is associated such that equipment could be used.
With respect to independent claims 11 and 19, the limitations reciting the abstract idea are indicated in bold below:
acquiring, as an authentication password, an issue password issued in accordance with a usage reservation of a rental equipment having been notified from a client terminal of a user;
determining whether or not the rental equipment is usable for selection based on a situation of the usage reservation when the issue password has not been previously issued and the usage reservation is made via the rental equipment or a control terminal of the rental equipment, and when a desired usage period in which a use of the rental equipment is desired has been accepted;
accepting, as the authentication password, a set password to be input from the rental equipment by the user when it is determined that the rental equipment is usable for selection and a timing when the usage reservation was accepted is included in the desired usage period, and when the rental equipment is rented, the set password is different from any password generated or transmitted by the server;
storing the acquired or accepted authentication password and equipment identification information of the rental equipment in a storage in association with each other in a usage reservation information table;
receiving an input password input by the user and the equipment identification information from the rental equipment when the rental equipment is used; and
determining whether or not the rental equipment is usable for selection based on whether or not a combination of the received input password and the equipment identification information is stored in the storage in the usage reservation information table of the storage.
As noted, the idea falls within the certain methods of organizing human activity grouping of abstract ideas because it is directed towards business relations such that as required when renting equipment. The noted abstract idea is also directed to concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) such as that required during determination of whether or not a combination of received input and equipment information is associated such that equipment could be used.
Because the above-noted limitations recite steps falling within the Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity and Mental Processes abstract idea groupings of the MPEP 2106, they have been determined to recite at least one abstract idea when evaluated under Step 2A Prong One of the eligibility inquiry.
Therefore, because the limitations above set forth activities falling within the Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity and Mental Processes abstract idea groupings described in the MPEP 2106, the additional elements recited in the claims are further evaluated, individually and in combination, under Step 2A Prong Two and Step 2B below. Claim 12 and 19 recites similar limitations as claim 1 and is therefore determined to recite the same abstract idea.
With respect to Step 2A Prong Two, the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The additional elements that fail to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application are:
server;
storage;
a client terminal of a user;
rental equipment;
a password acquirer;
a website controller;
a password authenticator.
However, using a computer environment such as a storage, a server, a password acquirer and a password authenticator amounts to no more than generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Renting equipment can reasonably be performed by pencil and paper until limited to a computerized environment by requiring the use of the claimed computer elements.
These additional elements have been evaluated, but fail to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they amount to using generic computing elements or computer-executable instructions (software) to perform the abstract idea, similar to adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent), and alternatively serve to link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment. See MPEP 2106.05(f) and 2106.05(h).
In addition, these limitations fail to provide an improvement to the functioning of a computer or to any other technology or technical field, fail to apply the exception with a particular machine, fail to apply the judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition, fail to effect a transformation of a particular article to a different state or thing, and fail to apply/use the abstract idea in a meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment.
Accordingly, because the Step 2A Prong One and Prong Two analysis resulted in the conclusion that the claims are directed to an abstract idea, additional analysis under Step 2B of the eligibility inquiry must be conducted in order to determine whether any claim element or combination of elements amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
With respect to Step 2B of the eligibility inquiry, it has been determined that the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
As noted above, the claims as a whole merely describes a method, computer system, and computer program product that generally “apply” the concepts discussed in prong 1 above. (See MPEP 2106.05 f (II)) In particular applicant has recited the computing components at a high-level of generality such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. As the court stated in TLI Communications v. LLC v. AV Automotive LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 613 (Fed. Cir. 2016) merely invoking generic computing components or machinery that perform their functions in their ordinary capacity to facilitate the abstract idea are mere instructions to implement the abstract idea within a computing environment and does not add significantly more to the abstract idea. Accordingly, these additional computer components do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Therefore, even when viewed as a whole, nothing in the claim adds significantly more (i.e. an inventive concept) to the abstract idea and as a result the claim is not patent eligible.
In addition, when taken as an ordered combination, the ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present as when the elements are taken individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements integrates the abstract idea into a practical application. Their collective functions merely provide generic computer implementation. Therefore, when viewed as a whole, these additional claim elements do not provide meaningful limitations to transform the abstract idea into a practical application of the abstract idea or that, as an ordered combination, amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
For the reasons identified with respect to Step 2A, prong 2, claims 1, 11 and 19 fail to recite additional elements that amount to an inventive concept. For example, use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general-purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a commercial or legal interaction or mathematical equation) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more (see MPEP 2106.05(g)). In addition, limitations that amount to merely indicating a field of use or technological environment in which to apply a judicial exception do not amount to significantly more than the exception itself, and cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application (see MPEP 2106.05(h)).
Dependent claims 3-4, 6-10, 12-18 and 20-22 recite the same abstract idea as recited in the independent claims, and when evaluated under Step 2A Prong One are found to merely recite details that serve to narrow the same abstract idea recited in the independent claims accompanied by the same generic computing elements or software as those addressed above in the discussion of the independent claims, which is not sufficient to amount to a practical application or add significantly more, or other additional elements that fail to amount to a practical application or add significantly more, as noted above.
Dependent claims 3-4, 8 further limits the abstract idea by narrowing the abstract by introducing limitations directed to data gathering. Further embellishing that the invention is capable of receiving information in a generic computing environment does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or adds significantly more to the abstract idea. Therefore the claims are also non-statutory subject matter.
Dependent claims 6-7, 10, 12-18 further limits the abstract idea by embellishing the abstract idea by introducing limitations related to generically processing data wherein the computer is merely used as a tool to perform the abstract steps added. Further embellishing that the invention is capable of processing information in a generic computing environment does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or adds significantly more to the abstract idea. Therefore the claims are also non-statutory subject matter.
Dependent claim 9 further limits the abstract idea by linking the judicial exception to a particular technological environment by introducing the limitation describing the client terminals. Further embellishing that the invention is capable of processing information in a generic computing environment does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or adds significantly more to the abstract idea
The ordered combination of elements in the dependent claims (including the limitations inherited from the parent claim(s)) add nothing that is not already present as when the elements are taken individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology, and the collective functions merely provide high level of generality computer implementation. Therefore, whether taken individually or as an order combination, the claims are nonetheless rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
For more information see MPEP 2106.
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, 3-4, 6-12, and 15-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being unpatentable by MINSLEY (US Patent Publication 2023/0039893) in view of Ma (US Patent Publication 2020/0327758).
Regarding claim 1, MINSLEY discloses: a rental equipment management method performed by a server, the rental equipment management method comprising:
storing, as an authentication password, an issue password issued in accordance with a usage reservation of a rental equipment having been notified from a client terminal of a user in a storage in association with equipment identification information of the rental equipment ([0061] In step 202, the unlock code is generated for the combination over-lock 110. Again, the unlock code can be generated at the time of manufacturing by the over-lock manufacturer, and transmitted with the over-lock 110 at the time of purchase by the self-storage facility.);
determining whether or not the rental equipment is usable for selection based on a situation of the usage reservation when the issue password has not been previously issued in connection with the usage reservation and the usage reservation is made via the rental equipment or a control terminal of the rental equipment, and when a desired usage period in which a use of the rental equipment is desired has been accepted (Figure 8 and 0100] In step 806, the management site 118 determines if the credentials are valid. If not, the process returns to step 804, and the customer 106 is prompted to re-enter their credentials. If the credentials are deemed valid, then in step 808, the management site 118 determines if the customer's account is indeed delinquent. If the customer 106 no longer has a past due balance, then the customer 106 is prompted to enter the identifier from the over-lock 110 in step 810. This scenario may occur, for example, if a customer 106 makes a payment to rectify a past due balance from a remote location, such as their home or work, and then subsequently arrives at the self-storage facility to discover a previously placed over-lock 110.);
accepting, as the authentication password, a set password to be set and input from the user when it is determined that the rental equipment is usable and a timing when the usage reservation was accepted is included in the desired usage period, the input password different from the ([0100] then the customer 106 is prompted to enter the identifier from the over-lock 110 in step 810. This scenario may occur, for example, if a customer 106 makes a payment to rectify a past due balance from a remote location, such as their home or work, and then subsequently arrives at the self-storage facility to discover a previously placed over-lock 110. [0105] The process then returns to step 808, where the management site 118 determines if the customer 106 still has a past due balance on their account. If there is no past due balance, then the customer 106 is prompted to enter the identifier from the over-lock 110 in step 810.);
receiving an input password input by a user from the rental equipment when the rental equipment is used ([0068] FIG. 3 is a flowchart illustrating the steps of decrypting an unlock code for a combination over-lock. In step 300, upon encountering an over-lock 110 on their storage unit 104, the customer 106 locates the identifier on the over-lock 110. The customer 106 can enter the identifier into a software application 114 on their mobile device 112, as described above. See further Figure 6); and
determining whether or not the rental equipment is usable for selection based on whether or not a combination of the received input password and the equipment identification information of the rental equipment is stored in the storage in the usage reservation information table of the storage ([0076] In step 304, the processing unit 120 receives the identifier. The processing unit 120 uses the identifier as an input to decrypt the unlock code. Various decryption techniques may be employed, and such techniques can include the use of private and public keys. In another embodiment, the decryption step involves performing a look-up operation in the database 122 to locate the over-lock record associated with the identifier. Once the relevant record is located, the processing unit 120 extracts the unlock code from the over-lock record. The look-up operation can be standalone, or in addition to the decryption techniques described herein. [0078] In step 306, the unlock code is transmitted to the mobile device 114 via the network 116 using a transceiver 124 coupled to the processor 120. Upon receipt by the mobile device 112, the software application 114 displays the unlock code to the customer 106. In yet another embodiment, the unlock code can be transmitted to the mobile device 112 from the management site 118 via SMS, MMS, email, or video chat. In yet another embodiment, the self-storage facility can place a telephone call to the customer 106 and verbally provide the unlock code. In this embodiment, human personnel, such as the self-storage manager 108 at the management suite 118, can place via an automated system or the telephone call. See further Figure 6.).
Minsley does not explicitly disclose:
the set password is different from any password generated or transmitted by the server;
storing, as the authentication password in the storage, the set password accepted in association with the equipment identification information of the rental equipment, such that the storage associates each of the issue password and the set password with respective equipment identification information in a usage reservation information table.
However Ma, which is similarly related to a lock management system further teaches:
a set password is different from any password generated or transmitted by the server (See Figure 24 and [0120] “The guest app 95 presents the guest with a “Create Account” screen 292 (FIG. 24) with fields 293, 295 and 296 for the guest to enter their name, email, and password.” wherein the user is able to create their own password in order to receive access.);
storing, as the authentication password in the storage, the set password accepted in association with the equipment identification information of the rental equipment, such that the storage associates each of the issue password and the set password with respective equipment identification information in a usage reservation information table ([0120] The guest app 95 presents the guest with a “Create Account” screen 292 (FIG. 24) with fields 293, 295 and 296 for the guest to enter their name, email, and password. In one implementation, a field 294 is provided for the guest to enter their room number. In another, the guest app 95 queries the LMS 11 or PMS for the information and fills it in. Another screen 302 (FIG. 25) presents a field for completing a second form of authentication. Thereafter, the guest can log into the app through a login screen 312 (FIG. 26). [0178] . The lock and amenity controllers either store the credential verification codes as is or generate and store a derivative of the credential verification codes.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include a set password that is different from any password generated or transmitted by the server and to store the set password since such modification in the system of Minsley is merely a combination of prior art elements previously known in the art that yield the known benefit of allowing the user to create a generate its own password thereby increasing customer experience.
Regarding claim 3, MINSLEY further discloses:
accepting the issue password as the authentication password without accepting the set password when the usage reservation has been accepted from the client terminal different from the rental equipment ([0215] FIG. 22 is an illustration of an electronic message transmitted to a customer's mobile device. In an embodiment, the customer receives a text message containing the self-storage unit number and an unlock code for an over-lock associated with the self-storage unit number and/or the customer. In another embodiment, the electronic message can include an over-lock identifier, such as a serial number. The electronic message can further include additional information, such as contact information for the self-storage facility, a customer service phone number or email address, turn-by-turn directions, a hyperlink to a map that provides instructions (i.e., a link to Apple Maps, Google Maps, or the like), the customer's account ledger balance, and any other information such as hours of operation or permittable access, additional rules, and safety information. [0216] In an embodiment, the unlock code can be a temporary unlock which expires after a pre-determined period of time, or a one-time-use unlock code. In these embodiments, the over-lock is replaced by the self-storage facility manager or operator after the pre-determined period of time has passed, or once the over-lock has been opened using the temporary unlock code. ).
Regarding claim 4, MINSLEY discloses:
receiving the set password from the rental equipment (([071] In another embodiment, the credential can include a one-time or limited use password provided by a secure token, such as a RSA SecurID®. [0115] In yet another embodiment, the over-lock 110 is an electronic lock that accepts a combination input via digital keys or a touchscreen. The customer 106 can be provided with a secure token that provides a one-time or limited use password, such as the RSA SecurID®.)).
Regarding claim 6, MINSLEY discloses:
accepting the usage reservation usable rental equipment from the client terminal and the rental equipment when a desired usage period in which the rental equipment is desired to be used has been accepted and when there is usable rental equipment from which the authentication password associated with the desired usage period included in a validity period is not issued ([0205] In step 2104, the lock management system determines if a previously delinquent customer account has become current. This determination can be made in a number of ways: (1) a customer record no longer has a delinquent flag, and (2) a customer record no longer has a past due account ledger balance. [0206] For example, upon a customer paying a past due account ledger balance, a delinquent flag is removed from the customer record in the property management system database. A webhook can be configured to detect the removal of the delinquent flag, and send a webhook URL to the lock management system (or another server, such as a SMS webpage server configured to receive the webhook URL). In an embodiment, the webhook URL can include, for example, the customer mobile number, unlock code, and self-storage unit number. The webhook URL can further include a message for the customer notifying them that they no longer have a delinquent account. [0207] If, in step 2104, the lock management identifies a customer account that has become current, then in step 2108, the unlock code is transmitted to the customer via an electronic message. In an embodiment, the lock management system transmits the electronic message to the customer's mobile device via text, SMS, MMS, email, or a secure message through a software application. ).
Regarding claim 7, MINSLEY discloses:
controlling, by a control terminal, a function of the rental equipment ([082] Upon a successful decryption at the management site 118, the unlock code is transmitted to the over-lock 110, which is automatically unlocked without further customer intervention.).
Regarding claim 8, MINSLEY discloses:
acquiring a password provided in a notification from the control terminal as the authentication password ([0215] FIG. 22 is an illustration of an electronic message transmitted to a customer's mobile device. In an embodiment, the customer receives a text message containing the self-storage unit number and an unlock code for an over-lock associated with the self-storage unit number and/or the customer. In another embodiment, the electronic message can include an over-lock identifier, such as a serial number. The electronic message can further include additional information, such as contact information for the self-storage facility, a customer service phone number or email address, turn-by-turn directions, a hyperlink to a map that provides instructions (i.e., a link to Apple Maps, Google Maps, or the like), the customer's account ledger balance, and any other information such as hours of operation or permittable access, additional rules, and safety information. ).
Regarding claim 9, MINSLEY discloses:
wherein the client terminal is any one of a smartphone, a tablet terminal, and a personal computer ([0053] The mobile device 112 is not limited to a mobile phone, and can include tablets, wearable devices, personal digital assistants (PDAs), laptop computers, “smart” watches, “smart” glasses, and any other device capable of receiving input from the customer 106, and which is capable of being connected to the network 116. ).
Regarding claim 10, MINSLEY discloses:
determining that the rental equipment is not usable when a reception time at which the input password has been received is outside of a validity period of the authentication password corresponding to the input password ([0186] In step 1902, if the lock management system determines that the location is not vacant, then the process returns to step 1900 where the lock management system continues to query the property management system based on the pre-determined interval. [0187] In step 1906, the lock management system again queries the property management system and determines if the location is still vacant. If the location is not vacant in step 1906, which indicates that the location has gone from being vacant in step 1902 to now being occupied in step 1906, then the process continues to step 1908.).
Regarding claim 11, MINSLEY discloses: a rental equipment management method performed by a server, the rental equipment management comprising:
acquiring, as an authentication password, an issue password issued in accordance with a usage reservation of a rental equipment having been notified from a client terminal of a user (0061] In step 202, the unlock code is generated for the combination over-lock 110. Again, the unlock code can be generated at the time of manufacturing by the over-lock manufacturer, and transmitted with the over-lock 110 at the time of purchase by the self-storage facility.);
determining whether or not the rental equipment is usable for selection based on a situation of the usage reservation when the issue password has not been previously issued and the usage reservation is made via the rental equipment or a control terminal of the rental equipment, and when a desired usage period in which a use of the rental equipment is desired has been accepted (Figure 8 and 0100] In step 806, the management site 118 determines if the credentials are valid. If not, the process returns to step 804, and the customer 106 is prompted to re-enter their credentials. If the credentials are deemed valid, then in step 808, the management site 118 determines if the customer's account is indeed delinquent. If the customer 106 no longer has a past due balance, then the customer 106 is prompted to enter the identifier from the over-lock 110 in step 810. This scenario may occur, for example, if a customer 106 makes a payment to rectify a past due balance from a remote location, such as their home or work, and then subsequently arrives at the self-storage facility to discover a previously placed over-lock 110.);
accepting, as the authentication password, a set password to be input from the rental equipment by the user when it is determined that the rental equipment is usable for selection and a timing when the usage reservation was accepted is included in the desired usage period, and when the rental equipment is rented ([0100] then the customer 106 is prompted to enter the identifier from the over-lock 110 in step 810. This scenario may occur, for example, if a customer 106 makes a payment to rectify a past due balance from a remote location, such as their home or work, and then subsequently arrives at the self-storage facility to discover a previously placed over-lock 110. [0105] The process then returns to step 808, where the management site 118 determines if the customer 106 still has a past due balance on their account. If there is no past due balance, then the customer 106 is prompted to enter the identifier from the over-lock 110 in step 810.);
storing the acquired or accepted authentication password and equipment identification information of the rental equipment in a storage in association with each other in a usage reservation information table ([0063] In an embodiment, the identifier and/or unlock code can be time-limited, and can expire after a pre-determined amount of time or on a certain date. In this embodiment, the expired identifier and/or unlock code must be re-generated as per step 200 and 202 above. [0064] In an embodiment, the unlock code can be generated using an encryption technique that utilizes the identifier as an input. In addition, another identifying input can be utilized for the encryption along with the identifier, such as a self-storage facility identifier, federal tax identification number, or a randomly generated string of characters. [0065] In step 204, the processing unit 120 associates the identifier with the unlock code for the over-lock 110 using an encryption technique. The encryption technique can include at least one of a hash function, a key derivation function, a block cipher operation, and an obfuscation function. In addition, the encryption algorithm used by the processing unit 120 can include a Triple Data Encryption Standard (DES) algorithm, a RSA cryptosystem algorithm, a Blowfish cipher algorithm, a Twofish cipher algorithm, or an Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) algorithm. [0194] In an embodiment, once the random unlock codes and identifiers are generated, they can be temporarily stored in a buffer, database, table, matrix, ledger, random access memory, volatile memory, or the like.);
receiving an input password input by the user and the equipment identification information from the rental equipment when the rental equipment is used ([0068] FIG. 3 is a flowchart illustrating the steps of decrypting an unlock code for a combination over-lock. In step 300, upon encountering an over-lock 110 on their storage unit 104, the customer 106 locates the identifier on the over-lock 110. The customer 106 can enter the identifier into a software application 114 on their mobile device 112, as described above. See further Figure 6); and
determining whether or not the rental equipment is usable based on whether or not a combination of the received input password and the equipment identification information is stored in the storage ([0076] In step 304, the processing unit 120 receives the identifier. The processing unit 120 uses the identifier as an input to decrypt the unlock code. Various decryption techniques may be employed, and such techniques can include the use of private and public keys. In another embodiment, the decryption step involves performing a look-up operation in the database 122 to locate the over-lock record associated with the identifier. Once the relevant record is located, the processing unit 120 extracts the unlock code from the over-lock record. The look-up operation can be standalone, or in addition to the decryption techniques described herein. [0078] In step 306, the unlock code is transmitted to the mobile device 114 via the network 116 using a transceiver 124 coupled to the processor 120. Upon receipt by the mobile device 112, the software application 114 displays the unlock code to the customer 106. In yet another embodiment, the unlock code can be transmitted to the mobile device 112 from the management site 118 via SMS, MMS, email, or video chat. In yet another embodiment, the self-storage facility can place a telephone call to the customer 106 and verbally provide the unlock code. In this embodiment, human personnel, such as the self-storage manager 108 at the management site 118, can place via an automated system or the telephone call. See further Figure 6.).
Minsley does not explicitly disclose:
the set password is different from any password generated or transmitted by the server;
storing, as the authentication password in the storage, the set password accepted in association with the equipment identification information of the rental equipment, such that the storage associates each of the issue password and the set password with respective equipment identification information in a usage reservation information table.
However Ma, which is similarly related to a lock management system further teaches:
a set password is different from any password generated or transmitted by the server (See Figure 24 and [0120] “The guest app 95 presents the guest with a “Create Account” screen 292 (FIG. 24) with fields 293, 295 and 296 for the guest to enter their name, email, and password.” wherein the user is able to create their own password in order to receive access.);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include a set password that is different from any password generated or transmitted by the server and to store the set password since such modification in the system of Minsley is merely a combination of prior art elements previously known in the art that yield the known benefit of allowing the user to create a generate its own password thereby increasing customer experience.
Regarding claim 12, MINSLEY discloses:
acquiring a detection result from a sensor; determining whether or not the user is located near the rental equipment based on the detection result of the sensor; and causing the rental equipment to be in a logoff state when there is no user near the rental equipment ([0060] In another embodiment, the over-lock 110 or tag can have a digitally imprinted code and/or microchip, such as a RFID or Bluetooth low energy transmitter. The customer 106 can be provided with a physical key fob that can read the code sent from the microchip, and which can display the code to the user. The key fob can be implemented into a software application on the mobile device 112 as well. In this embodiment, the identifier is not readily visible, which adds a layer of security against the over-lock 110, and its corresponding unlock code, becoming known over a period of time due to re-use. [0075] As described above, the management site 118 and/or processing unit 120 can be located remotely from the self-storage facility 102, and thus, the network 116 can include a WAN and utilize broadband, cellular, and/or satellite communication means. In another embodiment, the processing unit 120 can be located on-site at the self-storage facility 102. In this embodiment, in addition to the aforementioned communication means, the mobile device 112 can utilize a short-range communication protocol, such as Bluetooth®, infrared, ZigBee®, and/or optical wireless, to communicate with the computing hardware and software 119. ).
Regarding claim 15, MINSLEY discloses:
performing synchronization with regard to a time of the rental equipment corresponding to the rental equipment by transmitting a synchronization signal; and causing the rental equipment to be in a logoff state after an expiration date set with respect to the authentication password ([0063] In an embodiment, the identifier and/or unlock code can be time-limited, and can expire after a pre-determined amount of time or on a certain date. In this embodiment, the expired identifier and/or unlock code must be re-generated as per step 200 and 202 above. [0165] In yet another embodiment, the alphanumeric code has a time expiration, such that after a period of time, such as, for example, 30 days, the alphanumeric code is reset by the lock management system. [0216] In an embodiment, the unlock code can be a temporary unlock which expires after a pre-determined period of time, or a one-time-use unlock code. In these embodiments, the over-lock is replaced by the self-storage facility manager or operator after the pre-determined period of time has passed, or once the over-lock has been opened using the temporary unlock code.).
Regarding claim 16, MINSLEY discloses:
setting a validity period according to a usage period of the rental equipment in the authentication password; and determining that the rental equipment is usable only when the authentication password stored in usage reservation information table corresponds to the received input password and the authentication password is within the validity period ([0100] In step 806, the management site 118 determines if the credentials are valid. If not, the process returns to step 804, and the customer 106 is prompted to re-enter their credentials. If the credentials are deemed valid, then in step 808, the management site 118 determines if the customer's account is indeed delinquent. If the customer 106 no longer has a past due balance, then the customer 106 is prompted to enter the identifier from the over-lock 110 in step 810. This scenario may occur, for example, if a customer 106 makes a payment to rectify a past due balance from a remote location, such as their home or work, and then subsequently arrives at the self-storage facility to discover a previously placed over-lock 110. [0110] In step 906, the management site 118 determines if the credentials are valid. If not, the process returns to step 904 and the management site 118 requests the customer 106 to provide their credentials again. If the credentials are deemed valid, then in step 908, the management site 118 determines if the customer's account is indeed delinquent. If the customer 106 no longer has a past due balance, then the customer 106 is prompted to enter the identifier from the over-lock 110 in step 910. The customer 106 can verbally provide the identifier, enter the identifier via their alpha-numeric keypad on their mobile device 112, or scan the identifier and transmit it to the management site 118 using their mobile device 112. [0132] In step 1206, the management site 118 determines if the credentials are valid. If not, the process returns to step 1204, and the customer 106 is prompted to re-provide their credentials. If the credentials are deemed valid, then in step 1208, the customer is prompted to enter an account identifier. In this embodiment, the management site 118 receives the customer account identifier, and the management site 118 does not necessarily receive a serial number or unique identifier of the over-lock itself. The account identifier can include, but is not limited to, a storage unit/unit number, an account number, and any other identifier that associated the customer with a specific account or storage unit or units. The management site 118 performs a look-up function using the account identifier. The look-up function correlates the account identifier with the storage unit 104, the over-lock identifier, and/or the unlock code, as well as a customer account. In an embodiment, multiple customer accounts, or multiple individuals associated with a customer account, can be associated with the storage unit 104, the over-lock identifier, and/or the unlock code. ).
Regarding claim 17, MINSLEY discloses:
notifying the user that a period until an expiration date set for the authentication password is shorter than a prescribed period when the period until the expiration date is shorter than the prescribed period ([0178] In yet another embodiment, the lock management system can receive a real-time notification from the property management system when a customer account status changes from delinquent to non-delinquent, and vice-versa. [0185] In yet another embodiment, the lock management system can receive a real-time notification from the property management system when a location status changes from vacant to occupied, and vice-versa. [0206] For example, upon a customer paying a past due account ledger balance, a delinquent flag is removed from the customer record in the property management system database. A webhook can be configured to detect the removal of the delinquent flag, and send a webhook URL to the lock management system (or another server, such as a SMS webpage server configured to receive the webhook URL). In an embodiment, the webhook URL can include, for example, the customer mobile number, unlock code, and self-storage unit number. The webhook URL can further include a message for the customer notifying them that they no longer have a delinquent account. [0207] If, in step 2104, the lock management identifies a customer account that has become current, then in step 2108, the unlock code is transmitted to the customer via an electronic message. In an embodiment, the lock management system transmits the electronic message to the customer's mobile device via text, SMS, MMS, email, or a secure message through a software application.).
Regarding claim 18, MINSLEY discloses:
notifying the user that an expiration date set for the authentication password has passed when the expiration date has passed ([0063] In an embodiment, the identifier and/or unlock code can be time-limited, and can expire after a pre-determined amount of time or on a certain date. In this embodiment, the expired identifier and/or unlock code must be re-generated as per step 200 and 202 above. [0165] For example, the customer 106 can text the alphanumeric code “CODE” to the lock management system. In an embodiment, the alphanumeric code can be pre-determined by the lock management system, or alternatively, the alphanumeric code can be pre-determined by the customer 106. In yet another embodiment, the alphanumeric code has a time expiration, such that after a period of time, such as, for example, 30 days, the alphanumeric code is reset by the lock management system. [0166] In another embodiment, the customer 106 can speak the alphanumeric code (if it does not contain emojis), and the mobile device 112 can generate a voice-to-text message that is transmitted to the lock management system in the form of an electronic message. [0167] In step 1702, the lock management system receives the electronic message, and identifies the customer 106. In an embodiment, the lock management system determines the identity of the customer 106 using a caller ID system, as described herein with regards to step 1602 in FIG. 16. ).
Regarding claim 19, MINSLEY discloses a rental equipment management system including a server, the rental equipment management system comprising:
a password acquirer configured to acquire, as an authentication password an issue password issued, by the server in accordance with a usage reservation of a rental equipment having been notified from a client terminal of a user ([0061] In step 202, the unlock code is generated for the combination over-lock 110. Again, the unlock code can be generated at the time of manufacturing by the over-lock manufacturer, and transmitted with the over-lock 110 at the time of purchase by the self-storage facility. [0064] In an embodiment, the unlock code can be generated using an encryption technique that utilizes the identifier as an input. In addition, another identifying input can be utilized for the encryption along with the identifier, such as a self-storage facility identifier, federal tax identification number, or a randomly generated string of characters.);
a website controller ([0044] In an embodiment, the management site 118 includes computing hardware and software 119, consisting of a processing unit 120, a database 122, and a transceiver 124. The computing hardware and software 119 can include a server coupled to the network 116. In another embodiment, the processing unit 120 and database 122 can be cloud-based, and located on a server remote from the management site 118, such as on a server provided by Amazon Web Services® or the like. [050] The software application 114 can be a proprietary program created and/or owned by the self-storage facility 102, and which can be downloaded by the customer 106 from, for example, a website operated by the self-storage manager 108, the Apple iTunes App Store®, the Android App Store®, and the like.) configured to:
determine whether or not the rental equipment is usable for selection based on a situation of the usage reservation when the issue password has not been issued and the usage reservation is made via the rental equipment or a control terminal of the rental equipment, and when a desired usage period in which a use of the rental equipment is desired has been accepted (Figure 8 and 0100] In step 806, the management site 118 determines if the credentials are valid. If not, the process returns to step 804, and the customer 106 is prompted to re-enter their credentials. If the credentials are deemed valid, then in step 808, the management site 118 determines if the customer's account is indeed delinquent. If the customer 106 no longer has a past due balance, then the customer 106 is prompted to enter the identifier from the over-lock 110 in step 810. This scenario may occur, for example, if a customer 106 makes a payment to rectify a past due balance from a remote location, such as their home or work, and then subsequently arrives at the self-storage facility to discover a previously placed over-lock 110.),
accept, as the authentication password, a set password to be input from the rental equipment by a user when it is determined that the rental equipment is usable for selection and a timing when the usage reservation was accepted is included in the desired usage period, and when the rental equipment is rented ([0100] then the customer 106 is prompted to enter the identifier from the over-lock 110 in step 810. This scenario may occur, for example, if a customer 106 makes a payment to rectify a past due balance from a remote location, such as their home or work, and then subsequently arrives at the self-storage facility to discover a previously placed over-lock 110. [0105] The process then returns to step 808, where the management site 118 determines if the customer 106 still has a past due balance on their account. If there is no past due balance, then the customer 106 is prompted to enter the identifier from the over-lock 110 in step 810.);
a storage configured to store the authentication password acquired by the password acquirer or accepted by the website controller and in association with equipment identification information of the rental equipment in a usage reservation information table ([0194] In an embodiment, once the random unlock codes and identifiers are generated, they can be temporarily stored in a buffer, database, table, matrix, ledger, random access memory, volatile memory, or the like.); and
a password authenticator configured to
receive an input password input by a user and the equipment identification information from the rental equipment when the rental equipment is used ([0068] FIG. 3 is a flowchart illustrating the steps of decrypting an unlock code for a combination over-lock. In step 300, upon encountering an over-lock 110 on their storage unit 104, the customer 106 locates the identifier on the over-lock 110. The customer 106 can enter the identifier into a software application 114 on their mobile device 112, as described above. See further Figure 6) and
determine whether or not the rental equipment is usable for selection based on whether or not a combination of the received input password and the equipment identification information is stored in the storage in the usage reservation information table of the storage ([0076] In step 304, the processing unit 120 receives the identifier. The processing unit 120 uses the identifier as an input to decrypt the unlock code. Various decryption techniques may be employed, and such techniques can include the use of private and public keys. In another embodiment, the decryption step involves performing a look-up operation in the database 122 to locate the over-lock record associated with the identifier. Once the relevant record is located, the processing unit 120 extracts the unlock code from the over-lock record. The look-up operation can be standalone, or in addition to the decryption techniques described herein. [0078] In step 306, the unlock code is transmitted to the mobile device 114 via the network 116 using a transceiver 124 coupled to the processor 120. Upon receipt by the mobile device 112, the software application 114 displays the unlock code to the customer 106. In yet another embodiment, the unlock code can be transmitted to the mobile device 112 from the management site 118 via SMS, MMS, email, or video chat. In yet another embodiment, the self-storage facility can place a telephone call to the customer 106 and verbally provide the unlock code. In this embodiment, human personnel, such as the self-storage manager 108 at the management site 118, can place via an automated system or the telephone call. See further Figure 6.);
Minsley does not explicitly disclose:
the set password is different from any password generated or transmitted by the server;
storing, as the authentication password in the storage, the set password accepted in association with the equipment identification information of the rental equipment, such that the storage associates each of the issue password and the set password with respective equipment identification information in a usage reservation information table.
However Ma, which is similarly related to a lock management system further teaches:
a set password is different from any password generated or transmitted by the server (See Figure 24 and [0120] “The guest app 95 presents the guest with a “Create Account” screen 292 (FIG. 24) with fields 293, 295 and 296 for the guest to enter their name, email, and password.” wherein the user is able to create their own password in order to receive access.);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include a set password that is different from any password generated or transmitted by the server and to store the set password since such modification in the system of Minsley is merely a combination of prior art elements previously known in the art that yield the known benefit of allowing the user to create a generate its own password thereby increasing customer experience.
Regarding claim 20, MINSLEY discloses wherein the storage comprises a memory to store at least the authentication password and the equipment information ([0194] In an embodiment, once the random unlock codes and identifiers are generated, they can be temporarily stored in a buffer, database, table, matrix, ledger, random access memory, volatile memory, or the like.), and
wherein the server is configured to execute the rental equipment management method including the determining whether or not the rental equipment is usable ([051] processor 120).
Regarding claim 21, MINSLEY discloses wherein the storage comprises a memory to store at least the authentication password and the equipment information ([0194] In an embodiment, once the random unlock codes and identifiers are generated, they can be temporarily stored in a buffer, database, table, matrix, ledger, random access memory, volatile memory, or the like.), and
wherein the server is configured to execute the rental equipment management method including the determining whether or not the rental equipment is usable ([051] processor 120).
Regarding claim 22, MINSLEY discloses wherein the storage comprises a memory to store at least the authentication password and the equipment information ([0194] In an embodiment, once the random unlock codes and identifiers are generated, they can be temporarily stored in a buffer, database, table, matrix, ledger, random access memory, volatile memory, or the like.).
Claim(s) 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MINSLEY (US Patent Publication 2023/0039893) and Ma (US Patent Publication 2020/0327758) in view of TOKUCHI (US Patent Publication 2019/0130315).
Regarding claim 13, MINSLEY discloses a system and method related generating unlock codes for accessing a space to be rented for a period of time, however does not disclose extending the time period of the rental.
Minsley does not explicitly disclose:
determining whether or not an extension is possible when an extension request is accepted, and extending an expiration date set with respect to the authentication password when the extension is possible.
However TOKUCHI which similarly is related to renting spaces further teaches:
determining whether or not an extension is possible when an extension request is accepted, and extending an expiration date set with respect to the authentication password when the extension is possible ([0022] FIGS. 18A to 18C are diagrams illustrating an example of screens used to present other time-based rental spaces when it is difficult to extend a reservation of the time-based rental space in use: FIG. 18A illustrates a screen for asking the user whether to reserve another space, FIG. 18B illustrates a screen for presenting a first-place space, and FIG. 18C illustrates a screen for presenting a second-place space; [0107] The extension control unit 101 includes, for example, an extension estimation section 102 that estimates whether there is a need to extend a reservation, a reservation information obtaining section 103 that obtains information regarding reservations of the time-based rental space 3, an extension section 104 that performs various processes for extension including an additional reservation, and a reservation section 105 that performs various processes for reserving another time-based rental space 3 when extension is not possible. [0166] First, the extension control unit 101 determines whether to reserve another time-based rental space 3 (step S19). [0182] FIGS. 18A to 18C are diagrams illustrating an example of screens used to present other time-based rental spaces 3 when it is difficult to extend the reservation of the time-based rental space 3 in use. FIG. 18A illustrates a screen 161 for asking the user whether to reserve another space. FIG. 18B illustrates a screen 171 for presenting a first-place space. FIG. 18C illustrates a screen 181 for presenting a second-place space. [0191] In addition, even when it is difficult to extend a reservation, the extension control unit 101 presents other available time-based rental spaces 3. The user, therefore, can reserve another time-based rental space 3 while concentrating upon conversion or work. That is, an operation load of the user is reduced.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filled to modify the system in MINSLEY with the prior art elements as presented in TOKUCHI since such modification is merely a combination of prior art elements according to known methods that yield predictable results such as allowing the system to extend the time rental or presents other available time-based rental spaces as shown in TOKUCHI [0191].
Regarding claim 14, TOKUCHI further teaches:
determining that the extension is possible when other rental equipment which is of the same type as the rental equipment is usable ([0022] FIGS. 18A to 18C are diagrams illustrating an example of screens used to present other time-based rental spaces when it is difficult to extend a reservation of the time-based rental space in use: FIG. 18A illustrates a screen for asking the user whether to reserve another space, FIG. 18B illustrates a screen for presenting a first-place space, and FIG. 18C illustrates a screen for presenting a second-place space; [0166] First, the extension control unit 101 determines whether to reserve another time-based rental space 3 (step S19). [0182] FIGS. 18A to 18C are diagrams illustrating an example of screens used to present other time-based rental spaces 3 when it is difficult to extend the reservation of the time-based rental space 3 in use. FIG. 18A illustrates a screen 161 for asking the user whether to reserve another space. FIG. 18B illustrates a screen 171 for presenting a first-place space. FIG. 18C illustrates a screen 181 for presenting a second-place space. [0191] In addition, even when it is difficult to extend a reservation, the extension control unit 101 presents other available time-based rental spaces 3. The user, therefore, can reserve another time-based rental space 3 while concentrating upon conversion or work. That is, an operation load of the user is reduced.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filled to modify the system in MINSLEY with the prior art elements as presented in TOKUCHI since such modification is merely a combination of prior art elements according to known methods that yield predictable results such as allowing the system to extend the time rental or presents other available time-based rental spaces as shown in TOKUCHI [0191].
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/25/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
35 USC 101, Applicant argues:
“The claims solve a specific technical problem in password-based access control: how to manage authentication credentials across two fundamentally different and structurally asymmetric rental pathways - advance online reservation (via client terminal, server-issued password) and same-day walk-in rental (via the rental equipment or control terminal itself, user-set password) - within a single unified authentication system, without issuing conflicting credentials or requiring human intervention. This is not a problem that can be solved by pencil and paper, or performed in the human mind, as the Examiner asserts. Consider: the usage reservation information table must simultaneously track (i) equipment identification information, (ii) passwords of two different originating types, and (iii) validity periods associated with each, across multiple pieces of rental equipment with overlapping and concurrent reservations. The system must, in real time, determine whether a given (input password, equipment ID) pair is stored in this table, and do so without advance knowledge of whether the user took the reservation path or the walk-in path. A human manager with a paper ledger cannot perform this authentication and concurrent multi- equipment management at the required speed, accuracy, or scale. The claimed invention is a technical improvement to computer-based authentication and access control systems - not merely a computerization of a manual process.” Examiner respectfully disagrees. As a first matter, it appears the Applicant is arguing a business solution rather than an improvement in technology. Furthermore, the claim as written does not provide the level of detail argued. The claim merely requires for acquire an issued password, issued by a server in accordance with usage reservation, determine whether or not the rental equipment is usable for selection based on the usage reservation and no issued password, accept a set password when it is determined that the equipment is usable, store the authentication password (either acquired or issued) and receive and input password (the claim does not specify what password, therefore could be any) in order to determine whether or not the rental is usable. As written, the method merely received data, stores the data and makes a comparison of the data stored with data received in order to make a determination to rent or not an equipment. This is a process that can be performed completely manually until requirement of a server to transmit and website controller configured to make determinations.
“This is analogous to the claims held patent-eligible in Enfish, LLC V. Microsoft Corp., 822 F.3d 1327 (Fed. Cir. 2016), where the Federal Circuit found claims directed to a self- referential database table patent-eligible because they improved computer data storage and retrieval, not merely because they used a computer. Here, the usage reservation information table - specifically configured to store both server-issued and user-set passwords in association with equipment identification information, enabling unified lookup across two credential types - is an improvement to computer-based authentication architecture, not a generic data structure.” Examiner respectfully disagrees. In the instant case there is no self-referential database table recited but merely the system storing data when received. It is noted that the requirements of the claims, in terms of the storage, are 1-storing, as an authentication password, an issue password in accordance with usage reservation, 2-storing, as an authentication password, a set password in association with equipment information, 3- receiving input from a user, 4- determined if the received input is stored in the storage. This is a very generic data structure, which is further evidenced by Applicant’s original disclosure on FIG. 2 is a schematic diagram showing an example of a data structure and data of a password list stored by a server; FIG. 3 is a schematic diagram showing an example of a data structure and data of a usage reservation information table stored by a server; and FIG. 4 is a schematic diagram showing an example of a data structure and data of an equipment information table stored by the server, See Spec [0010].
“The claims are also analogous to those upheld in McRO, Inc. v. Bandai Namco Games America Inc., 837 F.3d 1299 (Fed. Cir. 2016), where a specific set of rules-based automated processes that produced results humans could not achieve the same way were held patent- eligible. The claimed bifurcated authentication logic - dynamically accepting either a server- issued or user-set credential based on the rental pathway, storing both types in a unified table, and performing combination-lookup authentication - cannot be replicated by a human performing 'renting equipment' mentally or on paper.” Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant is arguing functions and specifics not recited in the claims. The Applicant is reminded that the claims generically requires to acquire an issued password, issued by a server in accordance with usage reservation, determine whether or not the rental equipment is usable for selection based on the usage reservation and no issued password, accept a set password when it is determined that the equipment is usable, store the authentication password (either acquired or issued) and receive and input password (the claim does not specify what password, therefore could be any) in order to determine whether or not the rental is usable. As written, the method merely received data, stores the data and makes a comparison of the data stored with data received in order to make a determination to rent or not an equipment.
“The specific usage reservation information table structure, the bifurcated credential acquisition logic, and the combination-lookup authentication constitute a concrete, specifically-configured system architecture that improves over prior art password management systems. This is 'significantly more' under DDR Holdings, LLC v. Hotels.com, L.P., 773 F.3d 1245 (Fed. Cir. 2014), where claims directed to a specific technical solution to an internet-rooted problem were patent-eligible.” Examiner respectfully disagrees and finds the argument not persuasive due to the claim requirements and furthermore because the Applicant failed to provide an articulated reasoning as to how the claimed limitations provide significantly more than the abstract idea. Different from the instant case , DDR Holdings solved a problem unique to the internet rather than simply implementing a known business practice on a computer by reciting a hybrid web page that maintained a user on a host website while displaying third-party merchant products. The scope and merits of DDR Holdings do not apply to the instant case.
35 USC 102, Applicant argues:
Based on Applicant’s amendments Ma is introduced to cure the deficiencies of Minsley of a set password different from any password generated or transmitted by the server.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., same-day rentals without requiring the server to generate and transmit a code, without requiring the user to have a mobile application or email access, and without the overhead of the server-side credential issuance process.) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
“The claimed independent claims require a usage reservation information table (or storage) that stores both server-issued passwords and user-set passwords in association with equipment identification information, and that enables authentication by determining whether a combination of a received input password and equipment identification information is stored in this unified table. Minsley's database stores server-generated unlock codes associated with over- lock identifiers (see [0076]), but does not disclose a unified table that stores both server- generated and user-set credentials, nor does it disclose the combination-lookup authentication of the claimed type.” It is noted that the originally filled specification creates two independent tables for the data elements argued. The originally filled specification does not provide support for a usage reservation information table (or storage) that stores both server-issued passwords and user-set passwords in association with equipment identification information, and that enables authentication by determining whether a combination of a received input password and equipment identification information is stored in this unified table
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., a system that conditionally blocks the set-password path based on whether a the reservation came from a client terminal versus the rental equipment) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Claim 3 discloses accepting the issue password (i.e. server generated) to a client device (i.e. mobile device).
35 USC 103, Applicant argues:
Minsley discloses unlocking and relocking a storage unit over-lock; it does not disclose any extension of usage periods or evaluation of same-type equipment availability. Tokuchi (US 2019/0130315) is cited for extension of authorization information validity. However, Tokuchi does not disclose checking whether other equipment of the same type is available as the criterion for allowing extension. There is no motivation in the combined references to arrive at the specific condition recited in Claim 14 - that extension eligibility is determined by the availability of substitute equipment of the same model. In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, Minsley discloses renting storage space which is accessed through a lock and Tokuchi discloses extending the time periods for renting wherein the system offers the user similar spaces to those rented in order to extend the rent term for the user.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Abou Mahmoud (US 2015/0321641) DELEGATING CONTROL OF A VEHICLE. [0019] Database 116 may include data relating to a user and authenticating that user. The user is the person or computing device that is receiving delegation of the vehicle and will have control of the vehicle for a designated time period. The data can be a password, for example, a custom pin number, a randomly generated pin number, a onetime password using a password generator, a Quick Response (QR) code, an encrypted communication, a hyperlink, biometric data, or any other type of password data suitable for the foregoing intended use as known in the art. For example, the operator can create a custom pin number that the operator must notify the user of and the operator also updates database 116 via operator computing device 110. In an alternative embodiment, delegation program 114, or any other program, can create a random pin number, a custom pin code, a one time password using a password generator, a QR code, an encrypted communication, or a hyperlink that the operator can send to the user to use to authenticate access.
Maruyama (US 2022/0198466) DEADLINE MANAGEMENT SERVER, AGENT PROGRAM, AND TERMINAL RENTAL SYSTEM. 0053] Furthermore, as another method, a method of setting a logon account (a common user ID and a provisional password) in advance for the terminal, and changing only the “password” on a per-user basis is conceivable. In this case, an account is created in the terminal in advance, and the activation period data is received from the deadline management server using a personal device of the user, such as a smartphone, and also, a one-time password is generated from random numbers, and the received activation period data is coded together with the password into a code such as a QR code (registered trademark) and transferred to the agent program operating on the terminal to thereby change the provisional password for the account created in advance in the terminal, and the password after change is displayed on the screen of the personal device to thereby allow the user to log on. In this case, whether the device may be activated in relation to the user is determined by activating an application on the personal device and based on information about the smartphone (such as a telephone number), and the role of the deadline management server is only to issue the activation period data including the deadline data regarding the return deadline for the terminal, and terminal authentication is performed in a simplified manner by the personal terminal that is an external device.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARIA C SANTOS-DIAZ whose telephone number is (571)272-6532. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00AM-5:00PM.
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, Sarah Monfeldt can be reached at 571-270-1833. 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.
/MARIA C SANTOS-DIAZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3629
Prosecution Insights