DETAILED ACTION
This is a Non-Final Office Action in response to claims on 10/27/2023. Claims 1-20 are pending. The effective filing date is 01/20/2023.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/27/2023 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are: a receiving component, a processing component, a recording component, a controller, registration component, payment component in claim 1. Specification [0017-0018] describe the different components as processors with a standard computer parts such as CPU, ROM and RAM.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1-Claims 1-7 are directed to a processing device, which is a statutory category. Claims 8-13 are directed to a method, which is a statutory category. Claims 14-20 are directed to a sales terminal, which is an apparatus, which is a statutory category. Therefore, claims 1-20 pass step 1.
Step 2A, Prong 1-The claim 1, and similarly claims 8 and 14, recite:
a receiving component configured to receive processing requests of data collected in a store from a plurality of request sources (receiving data is collecting information, which can be a mental process, see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(A) a claim to "collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis," where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016));
a processing component configured to execute a predetermined process based on the data of the processing requests received by the receiving component (processing information is analyzing information, which can be a mental process, see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(A) a claim to "collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis," where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016));
a recording component configured to record, in association with an identifier for identifying each of the plurality of request sources, a processing date and time when the processing component last processes a processing request received from a request source corresponding to the identifier (recording and processing information is to collect and analyze information, see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(A) a claim to "collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis," where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016)); and
a controller configured to control, when the receiving component receives processing requests from the plurality of request sources, the processing component to preferentially process the processing requests of the plurality of request sources from a processing request of a request source that has an early processing date and time based on the processing date and time recorded in association with the identifier of each of the plurality of request sources (the management of processing and receiving of information is the management of information, see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(A) a claim to "collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis," where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016)).
Step 2A, Prong 2- The additional elements of independent claim 1, and similarly claims 8 and 14, include a receiving component, a processing component, a recording component, a controller, registration component, payment component, register and point of sales terminal. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the elements are presented as the tools to perform the abstract idea. Under MPEP 2106.05(f)(2) adding a general purpose computer to an abstract idea, such as a receiving component to receive information, or a point of sales terminal with processors to process information, will fail to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B-The independent claim 1, and similarly claim 8 and 14, do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the components are described in general terms, and do not show any particularity that would showcase the claim is directed to more than the abstract idea, since the ideas are being applied to the additional elements.
Dependent Claims
Claims 2-7, 8-13, and 15-20 add additional receiving and processing steps that remain abstract idea of sending and analyzing information under a mental process, and do not add additional elements that would showcase integration into a practical application, or more than the abstract idea under MPEP 2106.05(f).
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.
Claims 1-6, and 8-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2021/0201321 A1 Studnitzer et al. (hereinafter Studnitzer).
Regarding claim 1, Studnitzer teaches an information processing device, comprising:
a receiving component configured to receive processing requests of data collected in a store from a plurality of request sources (Studnitzer [0055] receiving order information);
a processing component configured to execute a predetermined process based on the data of the processing requests received by the receiving component (Studnitzer [0052] transaction processing system for received requests);
a recording component configured to record, in association with an identifier for identifying each of the plurality of request sources, a processing date and time when the processing component last processes a processing request received from a request source corresponding to the identifier (Studnitzer [0051] the information is recorded based on the received and processed information, time and date of the information is recorded); and
a controller configured to control, when the receiving component receives processing requests from the plurality of request sources, the processing component to preferentially process the processing requests of the plurality of request sources from a processing request of a request source that has an early processing date and time based on the processing date and time recorded in association with the identifier of each of the plurality of request sources (Studnitzer [0032] the order of processing uses a first in first out method, that utilized the time stamp of the request to determine the order of processing; [0052] data transaction procession has a central processor that controls).
Regarding claim 2, Studnitzer teaches the information processing device according to claim 1, wherein when the receiving component receives processing requests from the plurality of request sources, the controller sets one of the processing requests of the plurality of request sources that has an early processing date and time as an execution target, and controls the processing component to process the processing request (Studnitzer [0032] the order of processing uses a first in first out method, that utilized the time stamp of the request to determine the order of processing; [0052] data transaction procession has a central processor that controls).
Regarding claim 3, Studnitzer teaches the information processing device according to claim 1, further comprising: a storage controller configured to store, in a storage component, a processing request that is not processed by the processing component among the processing requests received by the receiving component, wherein when a plurality of processing requests are stored in the storage component, the controller determines that the receiving component receives processing requests from the plurality of request sources (Studnitzer [0032] the order of processing uses a first in first out method, that utilized the time stamp of the request to determine the order of processing; [0052] data transaction procession has a central processor that controls all operations).
Regarding claim 4, Studnitzer teaches the information processing device according to claim 1, further comprising: an output component configured to output a processing result of a processing request executed by the processing component to a request source of the processing request (Studnitzer [0126] the display device is output the determined information, and act as an interface to relay information to the user).
Regarding claim 5, Studnitzer teaches the information processing device according to claim 1, wherein the receiving component receives the processing requests from terminal devices serving as request sources of the processing requests or processes operating on the terminal devices (Studnitzer [0024] transaction request from participants).
Regarding claim 6, Studnitzer teaches the information processing device according to claim 1, wherein the receiving component receives processing requests of data collected in the store from a plurality of image sources (Studnitzer [0060] the transaction identifier may be codes or images, and this is what is received).
Regarding claim 8, Studnitzer teaches an information processing method, comprising:
receiving processing requests of data collected in a store from a plurality of request sources (Studnitzer [0055] receiving order information);
executing a predetermined process based on the data of the processing requests (Studnitzer [0052] transaction processing system for received requests);
recording, in association with an identifier for identifying each of the plurality of request sources, a processing date and time when a processing request received from a request source corresponding to the identifier is last processed (Studnitzer [0051] the information is recorded based on the received and processed information, time and date of the information is recorded); and
processing preferentially, when processing requests are received from the plurality of request sources, the processing requests of the plurality of request sources from a processing request of a request source that has an early processing date and time based on the processing date and time recorded in association with the identifier of each of the plurality of request sources (Studnitzer [0032] the order of processing uses a first in first out method, that utilized the time stamp of the request to determine the order of processing; [0052] data transaction procession has a central processor that controls).
Regarding claim 9, Studnitzer teaches the information processing method according to claim 8, further comprising: when receiving processing requests from the plurality of request sources, setting one of the processing requests of the plurality of request sources that has an early processing date and time as an execution target, and processing the processing request (Studnitzer [0032] the order of processing uses a first in first out method, that utilized the time stamp of the request to determine the order of processing; [0052] data transaction procession has a central processor that controls).
Regarding claim 10, Studnitzer teaches the information processing method according to claim 8, further comprising: storing a processing request that is not processed by the processing among the processing requests received; and when a plurality of processing requests are stored, determining that processing requests from the plurality of request sources are received (Studnitzer [0032] the order of processing uses a first in first out method, that utilized the time stamp of the request to determine the order of processing; [0052] data transaction procession has a central processor that controls all operations).
Regarding claim 11, Studnitzer teaches the information processing method according to claim 8, further comprising: outputting a processing result of a processing request executed to a request source of the processing request (Studnitzer [0126] the display device is output the determined information, and act as an interface to relay information to the user).
Regarding claim 12, Studnitzer teaches the information processing method according to claim 8, further comprising: receiving the processing requests from terminal devices serving as request sources of the processing requests or processes operating on the terminal devices (Studnitzer [0024] transaction request from participants).
Regarding claim 13, Studnitzer teaches the information processing method according to claim 8, further comprising: receiving processing requests of data collected in the store from a plurality of image sources (Studnitzer [0060] the transaction identifier may be codes or images, and this is what is received).
Regarding claim 14, Studnitzer teaches a point of sales terminal (Studnitzer [0068] transaction may be conducted with POS terminal), comprising:
a registration component to register a commodity to be purchased by a customer (Studnitzer [0059] a POS terminal or device of a merchant is a transaction request, or register);
a payment component to process payment of the commodity (Studnitzer [0059] the system includes a payment computer system);
a receiving component configured to receive processing requests of data collected in a store from a plurality of request sources (Studnitzer [0055] receiving order information);
a processing component configured to execute a predetermined process based on the data of the processing requests received by the receiving component (Studnitzer [0052] transaction processing system for received requests);
a recording component configured to record, in association with an identifier for identifying each of the plurality of request sources, a processing date and time when the processing component last processes a processing request received from a request source corresponding to the identifier (Studnitzer [0051] the information is recorded based on the received and processed information, time and date of the information is recorded); and
a controller configured to control, when the receiving component receives processing requests from the plurality of request sources, the processing component to preferentially process the processing requests of the plurality of request sources from a processing request of a request source that has an early processing date and time based on the processing date and time recorded in association with the identifier of each of the plurality of request sources (Studnitzer [0032] the order of processing uses a first in first out method, that utilized the time stamp of the request to determine the order of processing; [0052] data transaction procession has a central processor that controls).
Regarding claim 15, Studnitzer teaches the point of sales terminal according to claim 14, wherein when the receiving component receives processing requests from the plurality of request sources, the controller sets one of the processing requests of the plurality of request sources that has an early processing date and time as an execution target, and controls the processing component to process the processing request (Studnitzer [0032] the order of processing uses a first in first out method, that utilized the time stamp of the request to determine the order of processing; [0052] data transaction procession has a central processor that controls).
Regarding claim 16, Studnitzer teaches the point of sales terminal according to claim 14, further comprising: a storage controller configured to store, in a storage component, a processing request that is not processed by the processing component among the processing requests received by the receiving component, wherein when a plurality of processing requests are stored in the storage component, the controller determines that the receiving component receives processing requests from the plurality of request sources (Studnitzer [0032] the order of processing uses a first in first out method, that utilized the time stamp of the request to determine the order of processing; [0052] data transaction procession has a central processor that controls all operations).
Regarding claim 17, Studnitzer teaches the point of sales terminal according to claim 14, further comprising: an output component configured to output a processing result of a processing request executed by the processing component to a request source of the processing request (Studnitzer [0126] the display device is output the determined information, and act as an interface to relay information to the user).
Regarding claim 18, Studnitzer teaches the point of sales terminal according to claim 14, wherein the receiving component receives the processing requests from terminal devices serving as request sources of the processing requests or processes operating on the terminal devices (Studnitzer [0024] transaction request from participants).
Regarding claim 19, Studnitzer teaches the point of sales terminal according to claim 14, wherein the receiving component receives processing requests of data collected in the store from a plurality of image sources (Studnitzer [0060] the transaction identifier may be codes or images, and this is what is received).
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.
Claims 7 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Studnizter in view of US 2022/0366414 A1 Kakino et al. (hereinafter Kakino).
Regarding claim 7, Studnitzer teaches the information processing device according to claim 1. Studnitzer fails to explicitly disclose wherein the data collected in the store includes a commodity code. Kakino is in the field of POS processing devices (Kakino Abstract, processing and settlement) and teaches wherein the data collected in the store includes a commodity code (Kakino [0030] the identification of an image can be a commodity code). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the image identification of Studnitzer with the commodity code identification of Kakino. The motivation for doing so would be to provide information about the identificied object, and this can be the common use of commodity codes to identify information about the specific item (Kakino [0033-0034] obtaining information about the products using commodity codes).
Regarding claim 20, Studnitzer teaches the point of sales terminal according to claim 14. Studnitzer fails to explicitly disclose wherein the data collected in the store includes a commodity code. Kakino teaches wherein the data collected in the store includes a commodity code (Kakino [0030] the identification of an image can be a commodity code). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the image identification of Studnitzer with the commodity code identification of Kakino. The motivation for doing so would be to provide information about the identificied object, and this can be the common use of commodity codes to identify information about the specific item (Kakino [0033-0034] obtaining information about the products using commodity codes).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA E SULLIVAN whose telephone number is (571)272-9501. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th; 9:00 AM-5PM EST.
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 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.
/JESSICA E SULLIVAN/ Examiner, Art Unit 3627
/FAHD A OBEID/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3627