DETAILED ACTION
This action is in reply to the submission filed on 7/7/2025.
Status of Claims
Applicant’s cancellation of claim 2, amendments to claims 1, 7-9, and addition of claims 19-21 are acknowledged.
Claims 1 and 3-21 are currently pending and have been examined.
Response to Remarks
Applicant's remarks filed 7/7/2025 have been fully considered and have been found not persuasive in full. Regarding page 7, Raza paragraphs 16, 57 and 59 showing a track guide, as well as a lug coupling component for contacts enabling electronic communication. This reads on the separate coupling and positioning elements in the amended claims. Regarding page 6, newly cited Miki is relied upon to teach the added limitations to at least claim 1 regarding a basket placing table vertically spaced from the container basket of the cart. Regarding pages 8 and 9, Miki teaches the transparent table.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 9, 10-15, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Raza (US 20180370554) in view of Steiner (US 2021/0327224).
Claim 9. Raza teaches a point-of-sale terminal, further comprising:
a cart for a customer to carry a merchandise to be purchased; (para. 16 cart)
a settlement device configured to make settlement; and (para. 14 showing pay terminal on cart)
a camera to capture an image of the settlement. (Raza para. 49 showing camera for item recognition)
a coupling component configured to couple the cart to the settlement device (para. 59 showing cart and terminal coupled to each other; claim 1 showing coupled communication with terminal and cart; para. 57 showing coupling components such as wires; para. 16 showing lug and contacts for electronic coupling.)
a connection device that directs coupling of the cart and the settlement device by the coupling component, (Raza para. 16 showing shaped track portion to receive cart wheel contacts with dock)
wherein the cart being positioned to the settlement device comprises docking of casters (para. 52 showing wheels configured as casters) of the cart at respective guide members of the connection device in a state of the coupling component coupling the cart and the settlement device. (Raza para. 16 showing shaped track portion to receive cart wheel contacts with dock)
Raza does not, but Steiner teaches: a settlement device for a purchase price of the merchandise. Raza’s docking station included payment system and communication means with cart for checking out a cart, but not for settlement of merchandise in cart. Said settlement is done on a coupled terminal on the cart’s handle. Steiner teaches a merchandise settlement device that is standalone and is configured for accepting carts and initiating checkout. Combining said docking station in Raza, with the self-checkout machine in Steiner teaches these claims. (Steiner para. 28 and Figures 4A-4D showing cart acceptance kiosk for checkout purposes)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system of cart docking and checkout in Raza, with the known technique of cart-based self-checkout in Steiner, because applying the known technique would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system by allowing for automated scanning of items (para. 28 of Steiner showing system checking out items in cart).
Claim 10. Raza as modified by Steiner teaches the payment system according to claim 1, wherein
the coupling component comprises a positioning component configured to position the cart to a settlement device. (Raza para. 16 showing shaped track portion to receive cart wheel contacts with dock)
Raza’s docking station included payment system and communication means with cart for checking out a cart, but not for settlement of merchandise in cart. Said settlement is done on a coupled terminal on the cart’s handle. Steiner teaches a merchandise settlement device that is standalone and is configured for accepting carts and initiating checkout. Combining said docking station in Raza, with the self checkout machine in Reiner teaches these claims. (Steiner para. 28 and Figures 4A-4D showing cart acceptance kiosk for checkout purposes)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system of cart docking and checkout in Raza, with the known technique of cart-based self-checkout in Steiner, because applying the known technique would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system by allowing for automated scanning of items (para. 28 of Steiner showing system checking out items in cart).
Claim 15. Raza as modified by Steiner teaches the payment system according to claim 9, and a connection device that directs coupling of the cart and the settlement device by the coupling component, (Raza para. 16 showing shaped track portion to receive cart wheel contacts with dock)
wherein the cart being positioned to the settlement device comprises docking of casters (para. 52 showing wheels configured as casters) of the cart at respective guide members of the connection device in a state of the coupling component coupling the cart and the settlement device. (Raza para. 16 showing shaped track portion to receive cart wheel contacts with dock)
Raza does not, but Steiner teaches further comprising:
a detector configured to detect that the cart is positioned to the settlement device by the positioning component; and (Steiner para. 50 showing RFID antenna activating motor associated with track in kiosk, thereby detecting position of cart)
a controller configured to enable execution of settlement processing by the settlement device, based on the detection by the detector that the cart is positioned to the settlement device. (para. 50 of Steiner showing signal enabling execution of settlement processing (proceed with checkout, and scanning items for purchase)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system of cart docking and checkout in Raza, with the known technique of cart-based self-checkout in Steiner, because applying the known technique would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system by allowing for automated activation of system (para. 28 of Steiner showing system sensing items in carts for checkout).
Claim 11. Raza as modified by Steiner teaches the payment system according to claim 9, further comprising:
a fixing component configured to fix the cart to the settlement device. (Raza para. 44 showing coupling including fixing items together; para. 59 showing cart and terminal coupled to each other)
Claim 12. Raza as modified by Steiner teaches the payment system according to claim 9, wherein
the cart comprises a battery, and (Raza para. 55 showing battery)
the coupling component comprises a power feeding component configured to feed power from a settlement device to the battery. (Para. 16 showing charging by dock)
Raza does not, but Steiner teaches a merchandise settlement device that is standalone and is configured for accepting carts and initiating checkout. (Steiner para. 28 and Figures 4A-4D showing cart acceptance kiosk for checkout purposes)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system of cart docking and checkout in Raza, with the known technique of cart-based self-checkout in Steiner, because applying the known technique would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system by allowing for automated scanning of items (para. 28 of Steiner showing system checking out items in cart).
Claim 13. Raza as modified by Steiner teaches the payment system according to claim 9, wherein
the cart comprises a registration device configured to register the merchandise. (Raza para. 49 showing scanners for recording items placed in cart)
Claim 14. Raza as modified by Steiner teaches the payment system according to claim 13, wherein
the coupling component comprises a transmission component configured to transmit registration information of the merchandise registered by the registration device to the settlement device. (para. 14 of Raza showing communication between device and terminal for transmitting item sensed information)
Claim 17. Raza as modified by Steiner teaches a payment system comprising a plurality of point of sale terminals according to claim 9. (Raza para. 63 showing multiple of said cart systems)
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Raza in view of Steiner, and in further view of Lempiaine (FI 129454).
Claim 16. Raza as modified by Steiner teaches the payment system according to claim 9.
The connection between a cart and payment device in Raza is a lug and track (para. 62). Raza does not, but Lempiaine teaches wherein the coupling component comprises an electromagnet to facilitate attachment of a container to a facilitating device. (Lempiaine para. 34 showing electromagnetic engagement for attaching container and device).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system of cart docking and checkout in Raza as modified by Steiner, with the known technique of electromagnetic guidance in Lempiaine, because applying the known technique would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system by allowing for control of attachment (Lempiaine para. 34 showing electromagnetic means of attachment).
Claims 1, 3-7 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Raza (US 20180370554) in view of Steiner (US 2021/0327224), and in further view of Miki (JP 2018/79090)
Claim 1. Raza teaches a payment system, (para. 16, payment area) comprising:
a cart for a customer to carry a merchandise to be purchased; (para. 16 cart)
a settlement device configured to make settlement; and (para. 14 showing pay terminal on cart)
a coupling component configured to couple the cart to the settlement device (para. 59 showing cart and terminal coupled to each other; claim 1 showing coupled communication with terminal and cart; para. 57 showing coupling components such as wires)
wherein the coupling component comprises a positioning component configured to position the cart to the settlement device, (Raza para. 16 showing shaped track portion to receive cart wheel contacts with dock)
Raza’s docking station included payment system and communication means with cart for checking out a cart, but not for settlement of merchandise in cart. Said settlement is done on a coupled terminal on the cart’s handle. Steiner teaches a merchandise settlement device that is standalone and is configured for accepting carts and initiating checkout. Combining said docking station in Raza, with the self-checkout machine in Steiner teaches these claims. (Steiner para. 28 and Figures 4A-4D showing cart acceptance kiosk for checkout purposes)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system of cart docking and checkout in Raza, with the known technique of cart-based self-checkout in Steiner, because applying the known technique would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system by allowing for automated scanning of items (para. 28 of Steiner showing system checking out items in cart).
Raza in view of Steiner teaches a cart coupled to a settlement device for merchandise. Said modified Raza does not teach the following, but Miki does:
wherein the settlement device comprises a basket placing table for receiving a basket in absence of the cart, and (See Figure 5 of Miki showing a basket table at a POS)
wherein the positioning component is configured to position a container basket of the cart, that receives the merchandise, vertically spaced from the basket placing table. (See Figure 5 showing the vertical spacing of table in relation to cart.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system of cart docking and checkout in Raza as modified by Steiner, with the known technique of basket accommodation, because applying the known technique would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system by allowing for multiple types of shopping containers being accommodated. (See Miki Figure 5, showing cart and basket options.)
Claim 3. Said modified Raza teaches the payment system according to claim 1, further comprising:
a fixing component configured to fix the cart to the settlement device. (Raza para. 44 showing coupling including fixing items together; para. 59 showing cart and terminal coupled to each other)
Claim 4. Said modified Raza teaches the payment system according to claim 1, wherein
the cart comprises a battery, and (Raza para. 55)
the coupling component comprises a power feeding component configured to feed power from a settlement device to the battery. (Para. 16 showing charging by dock)
Raza does not, but Steiner teaches a merchandise settlement device that is standalone and is configured for accepting carts and initiating checkout. (Steiner para. 28 and Figures 4A-4D showing cart acceptance kiosk for checkout purposes)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system of cart docking and checkout in Raza, with the known technique of cart-based self-checkout in Steiner, because applying the known technique would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system by allowing for automated scanning of items (para. 28 of Steiner showing system checking out items in cart).
Claim 5. Said modified Raza teaches the payment system according to claim 1, wherein
the cart comprises a registration device configured to register the merchandise. (Raza para. 49 showing scanners for recording items placed in cart)
Claim 6. Said modified Raza teaches the payment system according to claim 5, wherein
the coupling component comprises a transmission component configured to transmit registration information of the merchandise registered by the registration device to the settlement device. (para. 14 of Raza showing communication between device and terminal for transmitting item sensed information)
Claim 7. Said modified Raza teaches the payment system according to claim 1, and a connection device that directs coupling of the cart and the settlement device by the coupling component, (Raza para. 16 showing shaped track portion to receive cart wheel contacts with dock)
wherein the cart being positioned to the settlement device comprises docking of casters (para. 52 showing wheels configured as casters) of the cart at respective guide members of the connection device in a state of the coupling component coupling the cart and the settlement device. (Raza para. 16 showing shaped track portion to receive cart wheel contacts with dock)
Raza does not, but Steiner teaches further comprising:
a detector configured to detect that the cart is positioned to the settlement device by the positioning component; and (Steiner para. 50 showing RFID antenna activating motor associated with track in kiosk, thereby detecting position of cart)
a controller configured to enable execution of settlement processing by the settlement device, based on the detection by the detector that the cart is positioned to the settlement device. (para. 50 of Steiner showing signal enabling execution of settlement processing (proceed with checkout, and scanning items for purchase)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system of cart docking and checkout in Raza, with the known technique of cart-based self-checkout in Steiner, because applying the known technique would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system by allowing for automated activation of system (para. 28 of Steiner showing system sensing items in carts for checkout).
Claim 18. Said modified Raza teaches the payment system according to claim 1. Raza does not, but Miki teaches wherein the basket placing table comprises a transparent material (See Miki Figure 5 for basket placing table, and para. 29 showing transparent plates in surface below basket. See translation accompanying reference attached.) enabling the customer to view the coupling component in a state of coupling the cart to the settlement device. (Said transparency enabling viewing through said surface.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system of cart docking and checkout in Raza as modified by Steiner, with the known technique of transparency, because applying the known technique would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system by allowing for increased visibility. (See plain meaning of “transparent”.)
Claim 19. Said modified Raza teaches the payment system according to claim 7. Raza does not, but Miki teaches wherein the basket placing table comprises a transparent material (See Miki Figure 5 for basket placing table, and para. 29 showing transparent plates in surface below basket. See translation accompanying reference attached.) enabling the customer to view the coupling component in a state of coupling the cart to the settlement device. (Said transparency enabling viewing through said surface.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system of cart docking and checkout in Raza as modified by Steiner, with the known technique of transparency, because applying the known technique would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system by allowing for increased visibility. (See plain meaning of “transparent”.)
Claim 20. Said modified Raza teaches the point-of-sale terminal of claim 9 wherein the settlement device comprises a basket placing table for receiving a basket in absence of the cart, and wherein the basket placing table comprises a transparent material enabling the customer to view the coupling component in a state of coupling the cart to the settlement device. (See Figure 5 of Miki showing a basket table at a POS) (See Miki Figure 5 for basket placing table, and para. 29 showing transparent plates in surface below basket. See translation accompanying reference attached.) (Said transparency enabling viewing through said surface.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system of cart docking and checkout in Raza as modified by Steiner, with the known technique of transparency, because applying the known technique would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system by allowing for increased visibility. (See plain meaning of “transparent”.)
Claims 8 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Raza in view of Steiner, Miki, and in further view of Lempiaine (FI 129454).
Claim 8. Raza teaches the payment system according to claim 1. The connection between a cart and payment device in Raza is a lug and track (para. 62).
Raza does not, but Lempiaine teaches wherein the coupling component comprises an electromagnet to facilitate attachment of a container to a facilitating device. (Lempiaine para. 34 showing electromagnetic engagement for attaching container and device).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system of cart docking and checkout in Raza, with the known technique of electromagnetic guidance in Lempiaine, because applying the known technique would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system by allowing for control of attachment (Lempiaine para. 34 showing electromagnetic means of attachment).
Claim 21. Raza as modified by Steiner and Miki teaches the point-of-sale terminal of claim 20. Raza teaches result of activation of the coupling component (para. 62 showing coupling). Raza does not, but Miki teaches viewable through the basket placing table. (See Miki Figure 5 for basket placing table, and para. 29 showing transparent plates in surface below basket. See translation accompanying reference attached.) (Said transparency enabling viewing through said surface.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system of cart docking and checkout in Raza as modified by Steiner, with the known technique of transparency, because applying the known technique would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system by allowing for increased visibility. (See plain meaning of “transparent”.)
Raza as modified by Steiner and Miki does not teach the following, but Lempiaine teaches wherein the coupling component comprises an electromagnet. (Lempiaine para. 34 showing electromagnetic engagement for attaching container and device).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system of cart docking and checkout in Raza, with the known technique of electromagnetic guidance in Lempiaine, because applying the known technique would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system by allowing for control of attachment (Lempiaine para. 34 showing electromagnetic means of attachment).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Aaron Tutor, whose telephone number is 571-272-3662. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 9 AM to 5 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Fahd Obeid, can be reached at 571-270-3324. The fax number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-5266.
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.
/AARON N TUTOR/Examiner, Art Unit 3627
/MICHAEL JARED WALKER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627