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 .
Applicant’s response and amendment dated 6/17/26 are acknowledged and entered. Claims 1-4, 6-11, 21-29 and 31 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 7-11, 21-29 and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lei (US 2020/0019743, previously cited).1 Regarding claim 1, Lei teaches a barcode reader, comprising: an imager configured to capture one or more images of a scene according to a field- of-view (paragraph 0046: camera 114 serves as an imager, see also paragraph 0134, step 702); and a processor operably coupled to the imager (paragraph 0145: processor 825), the processor configured to: operate the barcode reader in one of a pick mode or a non-pick mode (paragraph 0131); perform an initial evaluation of a single captured image for identifying a number of barcodes in the single captured image prior to performing any decoding analysis (paragraph 0134: step 704);2 automatically, without user input, enter the pick mode including enabling operations of the pick mode responsive to detecting multiple barcodes in the single captured image within the field-of-view of the imager during the initial evaluation (paragraph 0134: step 706); and automatically, without user input, enter the non-pick mode including disabling the operations of the pick mode responsive to detecting a single barcode in the single captured image within the field-of-view of the imager during the initial evaluation (paragraph 0135), wherein the operations of the pick mode include the processor analyzing a lesser portion of the single captured image or other images captured during the pick mode for a decoding analysis of a selected barcode within the respective image (paragraph 0137: step 708), and the operations of the non-pick mode include the processor analyzing the single captured image or other images captured during the non-pick mode for a decoding analysis the single barcode present within the respective image (paragraph 0137: step 710). Regarding claim 2, Lei teaches the processor remains in the non-pick mode after decoding the single barcode when no barcodes are detected to be present in a subsequent captured image (paragraph 0138: step 712). Regarding claim 3, Lei teaches the processor automatically enters, without user input, the non-pick mode after decoding the selected barcode while in the pick mode when no new barcodes are detected to be present in a subsequent captured image (paragraph 0139: step 714). Regarding claim 4, Lei teaches a housing configured in one of a handheld configuration or a presentation configuration (paragraph 0144). Regarding claim 7, Lei teaches the multiple barcodes in the single captured image are of a same barcode type (paragraph 0068). Regarding claim 8, Lei teaches the multiple barcodes in the single captured image are of a different barcode type (paragraph 0068). Regarding claim 9, Lei teaches one barcode type is a 1D barcode, and another barcode type is a 2D barcode (paragraph 0053). Regarding claim 10, Lei teaches one barcode type is a first type of 1D barcode (paragraph 0053), and another barcode type is a second type of 1D barcode detected by the processor from the image (paragraph 0053). Regarding claim 11, Lei teaches one barcode type is a first type of 2D barcode (paragraph 0053), and another barcode type is a second type of 2D barcode detected by the processor from the image (paragraph 0053). Regarding claim 21, Lei teaches the processor is further configured to operate the barcode reader in the non-pick mode responsive to detecting no barcodes within the single captured image of the field-of-view (paragraph 0138). Regarding claim 22, Lei teaches the processor is further configured to operate the barcode reader in an automatic pick mode selection process including the pick mode and the non-pick mode (paragraph 0138). Regarding claim 23, Lei teaches the processor is further configured to cause the barcode reader to initially enter the automatic pick mode selection process responsive to selection of a user input (paragraph 0134). Regarding claim 24, Lei teaches the processor is further configured to cause the barcode reader to initially enter the automatic pick mode selection process during power up by default (paragraph 0134). Regarding claim 25, Lei teaches the processor is further configured to automatically transition from the non-pick mode to the pick mode responsive to detecting multiple barcodes from another single image captured in real time while operating in the non-pick mode (paragraph 0134). Regarding claim 26, Lei teaches the processor is further configured to automatically transition from the pick mode to the non-pick mode responsive to an exit mode event (paragraph 0141). Regarding claim 27, Lei teaches the exit mode event includes at least one of detecting an item with the multiple barcodes exiting the field-of-view of the bar code reader, detecting only one barcode within the field-of-view, or decoding a selected barcode while within the pick mode (paragraph 0141). Regarding claim 28, Lei teaches the processor is further configured to automatically transition from the pick mode to the non-pick mode responsive to detecting a single barcode from another single image captured in real time while operating in the pick mode (paragraph 0141). Regarding claim 29, Lei teaches the pick mode defines a hierarchy of barcodes to be decoded when multiple barcodes are present within the field-of- view at the same time (paragraph 0134). Regarding claim 31, Lei teaches the elected barcode is based on detecting an aimer in proximity to a-the selected barcode to be decoded while ignoring other barcodes during the decoding analysis (paragraph 0134).
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.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lei in view of Nahill (US 2014/0061305, previously cited).3 Regarding claim 6, Lei teaches the barcode reader of claim 1, as discussed above. Lei does not explicitly teach the barcode reader is a mobile computer. Nahill teaches the barcode reader is a mobile computer (paragraph 0185). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to combine the teachings of Lei and Nahill, because a barcode reader on a mobile computer increases the convenience of the user.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/17/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the cited art fails to disclose all limitations of the claims. Applicant’s Remarks, pages 6-7. In particular, Applicant argues that Lei fails to disclose “perform an initial evaluation of a single captured image for identifying a number of barcodes in the single captured image prior to performing any decoding analysis.” Id. Applicant characterizes Lei as “tak[ing] for granted that…a second barcode may exist, and intends to decode all known barcode in each case – but only if the first barcode is able to be located and decoded.” Id. This is allegedly different that the instant application, where “there is a specific image analysis condition (identifying the number of barcodes) that is tied to mode control (operating in pick mode or non-pick mode).” Id. Paragraph 0137 of Lei states that the “reader may determine 710 whether the object has another barcode positioned on the object. The number of barcodes positioned on the object may be stored in a storage device on the reader.” This serves as identifying the number of barcodes. This determination is then tied to mode control, as discussed in paragraph 0138. Lei thus discloses this limitation. Applicant did not argue any other limitation, so those limitations are disclosed by Lei for the reasons set forth above in the rejection.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 MATTHEW MIKELS whose telephone number is (571)270-5470. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday 7:30 AM ET - 5:00 PM ET, Friday 7:30 AM ET - 9:30 AM ET, the Examiner is on central time.4
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, Thomas K Pham can be reached at 571-272-3689. 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.
/MATTHEW MIKELS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876
1 In addition to the cited paragraphs, please see also the associated figures.
2 See also additional discussion below.
3 In addition to the cited paragraphs, please see also the associated figures.
4 The Examiner can also be reached at matthew.mikels@uspto.gov.
Prosecution Insights