Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. This communication is in response to the Application No. 18/374,469 filed on 9/28/23. Claims 1 – 20 has been examined.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
3. 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.
4. 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.
5. Claims 5, 9, 11, 13 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.
6. Claim 6 recites the limitation "the receiver" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It should depend on claim 1.
7. Claim 9 recites the limitation “the first beacon” in line 1 “the second beacon” line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It should depend on claim 1.
8. Claim 11 recites the limitation "the receiver" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It should depend on claim 1.
9. Claim 13 recites the limitation “the first beacon” in line 1 “the second beacon” line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It should depend on claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
10. 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.
11. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
12. Claim(s) 1 – 8, 15 – 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Weiss et al. (US 9,904,903, Weiss hereafter).
Regarding claim 1, Weiss teaches A method of delivering an order to a customer of a business, the method comprising (Fig. 1; business such as pharmacy or restaurant/food):
transmitting, from a first beacon to a receiver associated with a customer, a first signal (transmitters 108.1-108.N may be implemented as iBeacons, which have been developed by Apple, Inc. In various embodiments, transmitters 108.1-108.N may be mounted to a surface of retail store 102; Fig. 1, 108.1 or any one of 108.1-108.N; provides beacons associated with a customer as in example shown as Alice brown in Fig. 1; col 4, lines 60 – col 5 line 2);
transmitting, from a second beacon to the receiver, a second signal (transmitters 108.1-108.N may be implemented as iBeacons, which have been developed by Apple, Inc. In various embodiments, transmitters 108.1-108.N may be mounted to a surface of retail store 102; Fig. 1, 108.2 or any one of 108.1-108.N; Fig. 1, col 4, lines 60 – col 5 line 2);
determining a location of the customer within a zone adjacent the business depending on the first signal received by the receiver, a first timestamp reflective of a time the first signal is received by the receiver, the second signal received by the receiver, and a second timestamp reflective of a time the second signal is received by the receiver (one or more of mobile computing devices 112.1-112.M may be configured to send timestamp data indicative of when each of the transmissions was received from one or more transmitters 108.1-108.N. For example, one or more of mobile computing devices 112.1-112.M may log a timestamp of when a transmission was first received from one or more of transmitters 108.1-108.N and/or a timestamp associated with receiving any suitable number of subsequent transmissions. One or more of back-end components 118 and/or to retail computing device 104 may then utilize this timestamp data to calculate information such as customer dwell times and overall service times, which is further discussed in detail below; Fig. 1; col 7, lines 59 – col 8 line 4); and
delivering the order to the customer at the location (Once one or more back-end components 118 correlates this information to stored data and retrieves Alice's pickup order details, one or more back-end components may send this information to retail computing device 104; col 9, lines 16 - 20).
Regarding claim 2, The method of claim 1, further comprising: communicating the location of the customer to the business (FIG. 4A is a block diagram of an exemplary set of ranging data 400 used to determine customer locations within a drive thru lane using a single transmitter, according to an embodiment, Fig. 4A; col 19 lines 19 - 21).
Regarding claim 3, The method of claim 1, further comprising: displaying the location of the customer on a digital sign within the business (In accordance with such embodiments, retail computing device 104 may receive customer information, ranging data, and/or customer prescription pickup order information from one or more mobile computing devices 112.1-112.M and to display a relative position of each customer in the drive-thru lane and their prescription pickup order using this information; col 11, lines 26 - 31).
Regarding claim 4, The method of claim 1, further comprising:
receiving, by a computer processor from the receiver, notification of reception of
the first signal, the first timestamp, notification of reception of the second signal, and the second timestamp (one or more of mobile computing devices 112.1-112.M may be configured to send timestamp data indicative of when each of the transmissions was received from one or more transmitters 108.1-108.N. For example, one or more of mobile computing devices 112.1-112.M may log a timestamp of when a transmission was first received from one or more of transmitters 108.1-108.N and/or a timestamp associated with receiving any suitable number of subsequent transmissions. One or more of back-end components 118 and/or to retail computing device 104 may then utilize this timestamp data to calculate information such as customer dwell times and overall service times, which is further discussed in detail below; Fig. 1; col 7, lines 59 – col 8 line 4);),
wherein the computer processor determines the location of the customer (In accordance with such embodiments, retail computing device 104 may receive customer information, ranging data, and/or customer prescription pickup order information from one or more mobile computing devices 112.1-112.M and to display a relative position of each customer in the drive-thru lane and their prescription pickup order using this information; col 11, lines 26 - 31).
Regarding claim 5, The method of claim 1, wherein the first beacon and the second beacon use low-energy short-range technology to transmit the first signal and second signal, respectively (For example, transmitters 108.1-108.N may transmit their respective UUIDs in accordance with a BLUETOOTH Low Energy (BLE) protocol, col 5 lines 54 - 57).
Regarding claim 6, The method of claim 5, wherein the receiver has short-range technology capabilities to receive the first signal and second signal, respectively (Again, retail computing device 104 may communicate with one or more of mobile computing devices 112.1-112.M directly via links 109.1-109.M using a first communication protocol (e.g., BLUETOOTH); col 11 lines 5 - 7).
Regarding claim 7, The method of claim 6, wherein the receiver associated with the customer is a mobile phone having a mobile application in communication with the computer processor (one or more of mobile computing devices 112.1-112.M may be implemented as a user equipment (UE), such as a smartphone, for example. Although mobile computing devices 112.1-112.M are illustrated in FIG. 1 as phones, one or more of mobile computing devices 112.1-112.M may be implemented as any suitable communication device configured to communicate with transmitters 108.1-108.N and communication network 116. For example, one or more of mobile computing devices 112.1-112.M may be implemented as a smartphone, a personal digital assistant (PDA), a tablet computer, a laptop computer, a wearable electronic device, etc; col 6 lines 20 - 30).
Regarding claim 8, The method of claim 1, wherein the business is a quick service restaurant and the order includes at least one food item (For example, if drive-thru computing device 300 is implemented in a restaurant drive-thru, the prescription information displayed in each of the portions 504.1-504.M may be replaced with food and/or drink order information, col 21 lines 1 - 5).
Regarding claim 15, the system substantially has same limitation(s) as claim 1, thus the same rejection is applicable.
Regarding claim 16, the system substantially has same limitation(s) as claim 7, thus the same rejection is applicable.
Regarding claim 17, the system substantially has same limitation(s) as claim 5, thus the same rejection is applicable.
Regarding claim 18, the system substantially has same limitation(s) as claim 8, thus the same rejection is applicable.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
13. 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.
14. 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.
15. 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.
16. Claim(s) 9 – 14, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weiss et al. (US 9,904,903, Weiss hereafter) in further view of Granbery et al. (US 9,875,472, Granbery hereafter).
Regarding claim 9, Weiss teaches the method of claim 8, even though it teaches having drive-thru facility such as pharmacy and/or restaurant. However, does not specifically disclose having multiple lanes or multiple waiting spots even though each location of each car can be interpreted as different parking spot but not explicitly disclosed. Examiner brings another reference Granbey to cure for these deficiencies.
Granbery in the same field of Endeavor further teaches wherein the first beacon is positioned adjacent a first waiting spot in a parking lot of the quick service restaurant and the second beacon is positioned adjacent a second waiting spot in the parking lot, and wherein the customer is within one of the first waiting spot and the second waiting spot (user 102 may only request a coffee. Thus, if another user has ordered 4 meals for a family in a vehicle, user 102 may be diverted to a different lane in the drive through having users with all small/quick orders or may be diverted to a lane ahead of the other user to reduce wait times for user 102. Wireless beacons 130 may actively monitor each lane to determine which users are in each lane, what their orders are, their place in the lane, and the length of the lane using the identifiers for each of those users and their associated orders. Thus, monitoring and checkout application 150 may determine or estimate an average wait time in each lane, a traffic flow of each lane, and a best lane for each user as they arrive at the merchant location for merchant 104 and/or submit orders; col 11 lines 7 - 48).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art at the time of the filing to combine the teachings of Granbery’s having multiple lanes with the system of Weiss. One would be motivated to combine these teachings because in doing so it can serve the customer faster.
Regarding claim 10, Weiss with Granbery teaches The method of claim 9, Granbery further comprising:
communicating to the quick service restaurant the location of the customer within one of the first waiting spot and the second waiting spot (Various locations may provide short range wireless communications with a device, such as through Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) beacon communications. These beacons may be set up at a location and communicate with devices to alert users of check-in services through their device; col 2, lines 9 - 13).
Regarding claim 11, Weiss teaches The method of claim 8, however, does not specifically teach wherein the receiver associated with the customer is a mobile phone having a mobile application in communication with the quick service restaurant, the method further comprising:
communicating, from the computer processor to the mobile phone via the
mobile application, an estimated amount of time until the order is delivered.
Granbery teaches wherein the receiver associated with the customer is a mobile phone having a mobile application in communication with the quick service restaurant, the method further comprising:
communicating, from the computer processor to the mobile phone via the
mobile application, an estimated amount of time until the order is delivered (Order 322 may include a payment total for an amount that the user may be required to pay the merchant. Additionally, the user may be shown order status 324 that display a number, wait time, line order, or other information that may be inform the user of user device 310 of the status, wait time, and/or line routing for order 322, col 16, lines 44 - 50).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art at the time of the filing to combine the teachings of Granbery’s showing wait times with the system of Weiss. One would be motivated to combine these teachings because in doing so it can provide customer the wait time; making the system more effective and user friendly.
Regarding claim 12, Weiss teaches The method of claim 11, further comprising:
Weiss does not specifically teach communicating, from the mobile phone via the mobile application to the computer processor, the order as placed by the customer.
Granbery further teaches communicating, from the mobile phone via the mobile application to the computer processor, the order as placed by the customer (communicating, to the device using the second wireless beacon at the second merchant station, transaction processing data associated with a mobile application of the device for electronic transaction processing of the purchase order at the second merchant station; and displaying the purchase order on a merchant device using the identifier; claim 18).
Regarding claim 13, Weiss teaches The method of claim 8,
Granbery teaches wherein the first beacon and the second beacon are each located adjacent a parking lot surrounding the quick service restaurant and the computer processor determines the location of the customer as the customer enters the parking lot (Check-in application 112 may also receive short range wireless communications from wireless beacons 130 at a location and transmit information to wireless beacons 130, including check-in information for a check-in process with merchant device 140 (or payment provider server 160 if payment provider server 160 provides check-in services) that associates user 102 with the location corresponding to wireless beacons 130. For example, the location for wireless beacons 130 may correspond to a drive through for merchant 104 where wireless beacons 130 is set up to communicate with user device 110 when user device 110 enters the drive through, exits the drive through, is travelling through the drive through, and/or is at a merchant station in the drive through (e.g., a ordering intercom, a payment window, a pick-up window, a toll booth, a gas pump, etc.). In such an example, wireless beacons 130 may be range limited to correspond only to a specific area within the drive through, and a plurality of other beacons may be distributed throughout the drive through, each capable of uniquely connecting to user device 110; col 5, lines 13 - 34).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art at the time of the filing to combine the teachings of Granbery’s having beacons as customer enters to the restaurant with the system of Weiss. One would be motivated to combine these teachings because in doing so it can direct customer accurately based on the business and can help serve the customer faster.
Regarding claim 14, Weiss with Granbery teaches The method of claim 13, Granbery further comprising: directing, by a digital sign in communication with the computer processor, the customer to a waiting spot in the parking lot as the customer enters the parking lot (the user may be checked-in through a device for the user, such as a mobile phone or a vehicles dashboard console that has communication capabilities with the beacon. Once the device establishes a communication channel with the beacon, check-in information or an identifier is received and associated with an order, Abstract).
Regarding claim 19, the system substantially has same limitation(s) as claim 9, thus the same rejection is applicable.
Regarding claim 20, the system substantially has same limitation(s) as claim 14, thus the same rejection is applicable.
Conclusion
17. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TANMAY K SHAH whose telephone number is (571)270-3624. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri - 8:00 - 5:00.
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, Chieh Fan can be reached at 571-272-3042. 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.
TANMAY K. SHAH
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2632
/TANMAY K SHAH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2632