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 .
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 8-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
In the instant case, Claims 8-13 are directed to a method claims. Therefore, these claims fall within the four statutory categories of invention.
The claim(s) recite(s) processing money relating to purchase of a commodity. Specifically, the claims recite discriminating, counting, storing, and determining a denomination of coins or bills, determining which of a customer and a store staff member deposited the coins and the bills, and processing change, which is grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” and/or “mathematical concepts” and/or “mental processes” grouping of abstract ideas in prong one of step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test (See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, 84 Fed. Reg. 50, 52, 54 (January 7, 2019)) because counting change during a transaction in commerce is considered to be a method of organizing human activity, i.e., the activity of performing commercial transactions between persons, is considered to be a mathematical concept at its basic level because of the counting of the coins and bills, and is considered a mental process as a human clerk and/or customer can perform the counting and organization. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea (See pages 7, 10, Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank International, et al., US Supreme Court, No. 13-298, June 19, 2014; 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, 84 Fed. Reg. 50, 53-54 (January 7, 2019)).
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because, when analyzed under prong two of step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test (See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, 84 Fed. Reg. 50, 54-55 (January 7, 2019)), there are no additional elements recited in Claims 8-10 and 13 and the additional element(s) of Claim(s) 11 and 12 generally link(s) the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment. Specifically, the key of Claim 11 and the button of Claim 12 perform(s) the steps or functions of determining which of a customer and a store staff member deposited the coins and the bills via human interaction with these elements. Generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it requires no more than a computer performing functions that correspond to acts required to carry out the abstract idea. The additional elements do not involve improvements to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field (MPEP 2106.05(a)), the claims do not apply or use the abstract idea to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition (Vanda Memo), the claims do not apply the abstract idea with, or by use of, a particular machine (MPEP 2106.05(b)), the claims do not effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing (MPEP 2106.05(c)), and the claims do not apply or use the abstract idea in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception (MPEP 2106.05(e) and Vanda Memo). Therefore, the claims do not, for example, purport to improve the functioning of a computer. Nor do they effect an improvement in any other technology or technical field. Accordingly, the additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and the claims are directed to an abstract idea.
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because, when analyzed under step 2B of the Alice/Mayo test (See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, 84 Fed. Reg. 50, 52, 56 (January 7, 2019)), the additional element(s) of using the key of Claim 11 and the button of Claim 12 to perform the steps amounts to no more than using a computer or processor to automate and/or implement the abstract idea of processing money relating to purchase of a commodity. As discussed above, taking the claim elements separately, the key of Claim 11 and the button of Claim 12 perform(s) the steps or functions of determining which of a customer and a store staff member deposited the coins and the bills via human interaction with these elements. These functions correspond to the actions required to perform the abstract idea. Viewed as a whole, the combination of elements recited in the claims merely recite the concept of processing money relating to purchase of a commodity. Therefore, the use of these additional elements does no more than employ the computer as a tool to automate and/or implement the abstract idea. The use of a computer or processor to merely automate and/or implement the abstract idea cannot provide significantly more than the abstract idea itself (MPEP 2106.05(I)(A)(f) & (h)). Therefore, the claim is not patent eligible.
Dependent claims 9-13 further describe the abstract idea of processing money relating to purchase of a commodity. The dependent claims do not include additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or that provide significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the dependent claims are also not patent eligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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) 1-3, 6-10, 13-16 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Inokami (US 2021/0133717 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Inokami discloses
a change machine (30), as illustrated in figures 1-3, which includes coin handling unit (50) and banknote handling unit (40), to which at least one of coins and bills relating to purchase of a commodity are deposited, i.e., via coin inlet (51) and banknote receiving unit (41), the change machine comprising:
a denomination discriminating component, i.e., coin recognition unit (52a) and banknote recognition unit (46), as illustrated in figure 3, configured to discriminate denominations of the deposited coins or bills;
a counting component, i.e., POS control unit (26), coin change control unit (59) and banknote change control unit (49a), as illustrated in figure 3, configured to count a number of the coins or the bills for each of the discriminated denominations;
a storage component, i.e., coin storage unit (53) and banknote storage unit (47), configured to store a limit number of the coins or the bills, as illustrated in figure 3;
a number determining component configured to determine a denomination of the coins or the bills, i.e., construed as the coin change control unit (59), banknote change control unit (49) and settlement unit (26c), the number of which counted in one transaction by the counting component reached the limit number, as mentioned at paragraphs 45-47, for example;
an operator determining component, i.e., IC (integrated circuit) card reader (23a), as illustrated in figure 3 and as mentioned at abstract and paragraphs 7 and 34, for example, configured to determine which of a customer and a store staff member deposited the coins or the bills; and
a deposit controller configured to, if the operator determining component determines that the customer deposited the coins or the bills, return the coins or the bills of the denomination after reaching the limit number, i.e., construed as the amount of change required to be returned, for example, via cash dispensing control (26f) and the amount to be handled control (26e), as illustrated in figure 3, and, if the operator determining component determines that the store staff member deposited the coins or the bills, allows storage of the coins or the bills of the denomination after reaching the limit number, as mentioned at paragraphs 3, 24 and 34, which states as follows.
[0003] Conventionally, cash handling systems for performing processes on cash have been installed in various stores such as convenience stores and supermarkets. In many cash handling systems, a cash register having a point-of-sales management function (hereinafter referred to as “POS register”) and a money handling apparatus (hereinafter referred to as “change machine”) are communicably connected to each other. For example, a store clerk scans a barcode attached to an item with a barcode reader of the POS register to specify the price of the item. When the clerk inserts money received from a customer into the change machine, change is dispensed from the change machine.
[0024] The POS register 20 performs a transaction process when the customer purchase items. Specifically, the POS register 20 receives an input of data of items that the customer purchases, and calculates a purchase amount that is the total of the prices of the items. The change machine 30 receives money that the clerk has received from the customer, and transmits the total amount of the received money to the POS register 20. When the amount of the received money exceeds the purchase amount, the POS register 20 instructs the change machine 30 to dispense change and the change machine 30 dispenses the change.
[0034] A store clerk who is an operator of the POS register 20 may input the first amount and the second amount. Alternatively, cards having codes (e.g., QR codes (registered trademark)) indicating different monetary amounts may be prepared near the POS register 20 or the like, and the clerk may perform an operation of reading a card selected by a customer. Alternatively, a customer may perform an operation of inputting monetary amounts by using an operation/display unit prepared for a customer. Still alternatively, a cash-out amount may be designated through a card while a charge amount may be inputted through the operation/display unit by a customer. Thus, different input means may be used for each amount.
Emphasis provided.
Regarding Claim 2, Inokami discloses
wherein, if any one of a plurality of kinds of conditions is satisfied, the
operator determining component determines that the store staff member deposited the coins or the bills and, if all of the plurality of kinds of conditions are not satisfied, the operator determining component determines that the customer
deposited the coins or the bills, noting that if the customer enters information into the display as mentioned at paragraph 34, then the system knows the customer deposited the coins or bills.
Regarding Claim 3, Inokami discloses wherein the change machine (30) is a coin change machine (50) to which the coins are deposited, as illustrated in figure 3, for example.
Regarding Claim 6, Inokami discloses, wherein the limit number of the coins is different from the limit number of the bills, noting that paragraph 32 mentions in the third sentence, that “in a case where a settlement amount and a charge amount are designated, a difference between these amounts is obtained as a cash-out amount” which means that for a particular transaction, the amount of coins and bills required to make change will be different so that the limit number of the coins is different from the limit number of bills.
Regarding Claim 7, see the rejection of Claim 6, above.
Regarding Claim 8, see the rejection of Claim 1, above.
Regarding Claim 9, see the rejection of Claim 2, above.
Regarding Claim 10, see the rejection of Claim 6, above.
Regarding Claim 13, see the rejection of Claim 6, above.
Regarding Claim 14, see the rejection of Claim 1, above.
Regarding Claim 15, see the rejection of Claim 2, above.
Regarding Claim 16, see the rejection of Claim 3, above.
Regarding Claim 19, see the rejection of Claim 6, above.
Regarding Claim 20, see the rejection of Claim 6, above.
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.
Claim(s) 4, 5, 11, 12, 17 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inokami (US 2021/0133717 A1) in view of Fukatsu (US 4,524,268).
Regarding Claims 4, 5, 11, 12, 17 and 18, Inokami teaches the system as described above.
Regarding Claim 4, Inokami does not expressly teach further comprising a key operation component configured to change operation content of the change machine to a deposit mode according to a turning position of a key inserted into the key operation component, wherein if a position of the key in the key operation component is a position of the deposit mode, the operator determining component determines that the store staff member deposited the coins or the bills.
Regarding Claim 4, Inokami does not expressly teach, but Fukatsu teaches further comprising a key operation component, i.e., key switch (125), as mentioned at col. 11, lines 5-15 and as illustrated in figures 16a-16d, for example, configured to change operation content of the change machine (9) to a deposit mode according to a turning position of a key inserted into the key operation component, wherein
if a position of the key in the key operation component is a position of the deposit mode, the operator determining component determines that the store staff member deposited the coins or the bills, as mentioned at col. 11, lines 5-48, which state as follows.
(49) In the flow chart shown in FIGS. 16A to 16D, when a replenishing key switch 125 is not turned on, the normal transaction state is set in either the deposit or withdrawal transaction mode. When the bank personnel insert a key 126 in a slit of the replenishing key switch 125 and turns it therein, a lever 127 urges a switch 128, and a replenishing signal is generated. The replenishing key switch 125 does not generate the replenishing signal if a key other than the key 126 is inserted.
(50) When the personnel judge that bills are replenished from the machine A to the machine B in accordance with the display of the remaining bill monitor 111, the bank personnel specify the withdrawal transaction mode at the keyboard so as to dispense bills from the machine A. When the replenishing key switch 125 is turned on through the key 126, the machine A is set in the partial examination mode in response to the replenishing signal. When the card CA is inserted, the main control section 90 of the machine A communicates with the group control section 110, so that the type of denomination and number of bills to be transferred to the machine B are displayed on the CRT 71 of the machine A. When the personnel key in the amount in accordance with the display of the machine A, the bills P are dispensed from the bill receiving/dispensing port 4. Thereafter, the IC memory card CA is dispensed from the machine A, and a receipt 56 showing the amount of dispensed bills is issued. After the bills are dispensed, the main control section 90 of the machine A communicates with the group control section 110 again and transmits data of partial examination bills dispensed from the bill storage sections 17 and 18.
(51) The personnel carry the partial examination bills and enter the bills in the machine B. When the replenishing key switch 125 is turned on by the key 126, the machine B is set in the replenishing mode. Thereafter, the personnel insert the passbook E in the card/passbook receiving/dispensing port 5 in the same manner as in the normal deposit transaction mode, and enter the bills P. The number of bills and the type of denominations are printed on the passbook E. The passbook E is dispensed from the card/passbook receiving/dispensing port 5.
Emphasis provided.
Regarding Claim 4, before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to have provided further comprising a key operation component configured to change operation content of the change machine to a deposit mode according to a turning position of a key inserted into the key operation component, wherein if a position of the key in the key operation component is a position of the deposit mode, the operator determining component determines that the store staff member deposited the coins or the bills, as taught by Fukatsu in Inokami’s change machine for the purpose of securely changing from mode to mode.
Regarding Claim 5, official notice is taken that it would have been obvious as a matter of design choice to have included a button component including one or a plurality of buttons, wherein
if operation for changing operation content of the change
machine to a deposit mode was performed in the button operation
component, the operator determining component determines that
the store staff member deposited the coins or the bills,
in Inokami’s change machine as another alternative means of inputting information.
Regarding Claim 11, see the rejection of Claim 4, above.
Regarding Claim 12, see the rejection of Claim 5, above.
Regarding Claim 17, see the rejection of Claim 4, above.
Regarding Claim 18, see the rejection of Claim 5, above.
Conclusion
Applicant is encouraged to contact the Examiner should there be any questions about this rejection or in an endeavor to explore potential amendments or potential allowable subject matter.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tabata ‘149 is cited as teaching a coin roll dispensing drawer that is part of a point of sale system as illustrated in figures 1 and 2 which enables a clerk to cause the drawer to dispense a roll for replenishment by the clerk into the coin handling device (3a).
Shibauya ‘435 is cited as teaching point of sale device with a mode switch (6) with different modes based upon the rotational position, as mentioned in paragraph 39.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEFFREY ALAN SHAPIRO whose telephone number is (571)272-6943. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday generally between 8:30AM and 6:30PM.
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, Anita Y Coupe can be reached at 571-270-3614. 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.
/JEFFREY A SHAPIRO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619
June 27, 2026
Prosecution Insights