DETAILED ACTION
This Final Office action is in response to Applicant’s response on 05/11/2026. Claims 1-22 are pending. The effective filing date of the claimed invention is 09/05/2017.
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 § 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.
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.
Claims 1, 17, 18, 20, 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2003/0132298 to Swartz (“Swartz”) in view of U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2008/0209965 to Maack (“Maack”).
With regard to claim 1, Swartz discloses the claimed data capture system for use within a venue (e.g. [0043] The present invention will be described in terms of an improved retail shopping system.), comprising:
a data capture device repository housing a plurality of data capture devices, each of the plurality of data capture devices configured to capture product data via an imaging component, each of the plurality of data capture devices having a respective housing (see e.g. [0090] dispenser unit 230 that holds several portable terminal with barcode reader, and dispenses said terminal(s) individually to users, as disclosed; [0092] The hand-held portable terminal 240 is stored in one of a plurality of slots 234 in the dispenser unit 230.);
a first data acquisition assembly configured to capture, via a mobile device associated with a customer, customer data associated with the customer (see e.g. [0088-89] card reader (a first data acquisition assembly) that reads card (mobile device) associated with customer. The card is a “mobile device” as claimed in that it is mobile, and it is a device as, in Swartz [0088] “a customer is provided with a customer card 210 having encoded customer data stored thereon.” This isn’t just a card. It’s a card with encoded information stored therein. When the card is read, this facilitates the capturing of, Swartz [009], “A card reader on the entrance unit 220 reads the information stored on the card and checks with the central storage system to confirm that a corresponding customer data file exists and that the customer is authorized to use the system.” Accordingly, the card with encoded information of the customer fully satisfies the claimed “mobile device” of claim 1. All that’s recited is “a mobile device associated with a customer.” The card that is unique to the customer, with encoded data, fully satisfies this limitation. For the mobile device as a mobile phone device, see the various dependent claims where that is addressed.); and
a server having at least one hardware processor, the server being communicatively coupled to at least one of the data capture device repository and the first data acquisition assembly, the server being configured to, upon the first data acquisition assembly capturing the customer data associated with the customer, associate one of the plurality of data capture devices with at least one of the customer and the customer data associated with the customer, resulting in an associated data capture device, wherein the data capture device repository is configured to lockingly house each of the plurality of data capture devices (see e.g. [0011] [0042-43] [0051] [0059-64] [0092] [0095] [0108] etc., central host 14 and controller 150 functioning as the central host for the portable terminals. The controller/host is coupled to portable terminals via wireless LAN and to POS systems, it also interacts with the entrance unit 220/dispenser unit 230 and processes biometric data; [0092] Each of the slots is physically and electronically marked and may be provided with locking means for locking the portable terminal 240 in place until the portable terminal is assigned for use to a customer.), and
wherein the data capture device repository is further configured to, responsive to an association of the one of the plurality of data capture devices with the at least one of the customer and the customer data associated with the customer, unlock the associated data capture device for removal of the associated data capture device from the data capture device repository upon a receipt of an unlock signal (see e.g. [0092] when the portable terminal is assigned to a customer, the locking means is disengaged, allowing removal; if the terminal is not removed in time, it is relocked and the customer’s data file is updated. The disengagement is under control of the central processor / controller 150 and implies an electronic control signal).
Swartz does not explicitly disclose the unlock signal. Maack teaches at e.g. [0008] [0011] published claim 1 and 6, abstract that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the portable electronic device art to include the ability to generate an electronic signal to respective activate or deactivate said mechanical lock 102. Where the motivation to combine this feature from Maaqck to Swartz, is shown in Maack at [0001] “a software controlled mechanical lock for the prevention of theft of portable electronic devices such as battery-powered medical and consumer electronic devices.” See also Maack, [0007] Thus, it is in object of the present invention to provide a security system for a portable electronic device for preventing unauthorised removal thereof from a docking station without the need to perform repeated mechanical operations to selectively activate and deactivate the security system. Maack [0011].
With regard to claim 17, Swartz further discloses a mobile application (app) implementing a graphical user interface (GUI), the mobile app configured to execute instructions, via one or more processors of the mobile device, to compile a product register, the product register including a list of products whose respective product data has been captured via the associated data capture device, the product register being stored within a memory of the mobile device (see e.g. published claim 19).
With regard to claim 18, Swartz further discloses where the mobile app is further configured to execute the instructions to remove a to-be-removed product from the list of products upon (i) receiving a trigger indicative of a product-subtraction operation and (ii) capturing, via the associated data capture device, the respective product data associated with the to-be-removed product (see e.g. [0046] [0055] [0098]).
With regard to claim 20, Swartz further discloses where the server is further configured to, upon a detection of a repositioning of the associated data capture device into the data capture device repository, close a session for products whose respective product data has been captured via at least one of the associated data capture device and the mobile device (see e.g. [0108-112]).
With regard to claim 21, Swartz discloses the associated data capture device includes a charge pack configured to be connected to and to provide power to the mobile device ([0246]).
Claim(s) 2-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Swartz, Maack, and further in view of U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2016/0156207 to Frankenberger (“Frankenberger”).
With regard to claim 2-4, Swartz does not disclose claim 2. Swartz discloses that the scanner can be equipped with a battery at e.g. [0049], [0050], [0054], [0236] [0238]. Swartz does not appear to disclose that the scanner is chosen based on a battery charge level. Frankenberger teaches at e.g. [0025-28] where the device(s) are charged in the housing, and then when the battery level reaches various threhsold(s) alert(s) to different degrees can be provided to a user to indicate that the device is ready to be used. The obvious advantage to this combination is that the user is able to select the device, or the device being selectively available to the user, based on the battery charge threshold satisfied, charge level, or the like, as described in Frankenberger at cited portions. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the mobile device art to include selection based on the charge level of the electronic device, as shown in Frankenstein, where this is beneficial in that the user is able to select the device, or the device being selectively available to the user, based on the battery charge threshold satisfied, charge level, or the like
Claim(s) 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Swartz, Maack, and further in view of U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2015/0189006 to Smus et al. (“Smus”)
With regard to claims 5-7, Swartz/Maach does not appear to teach the limitations of claim 5, 6. For claim 7, see Swartz at e.g. [0225] where the system is fully capable of providing alerts to customer(s) based on time. For the pairing aspects, see Smus. Smus teaches at e.g. abstract, [0004] [0005-8] [0016-20] [0047-49] entering wireless pairing mode, pair a first and second device, and pairing credentials such as various identifiers and token at [0047-49]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the electronic device art before the effective filing date of modify Swartz/Maack to include such pairing between devices, as shown in Smus, where the advantage of such added functionality allows for data transfer between the devices. See Smus, [0004]
Claim(s) 8-11, 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Swartz, Maack, and further in view of U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2015/0032559 to Sonnendorfer et al. (“Sonnendorfer”).
With regard to claim 8-11, 19, Swartz/ Maack do not teach claim 8-11, 19. Sonnendorfer does teach where the associated data capture device is removably attachable to a shopping cart having an item-receiving area (see e.g. Fig. 2). For claim 9 FOV, see e.g. [0117]. For claim 10, see e.g. [0016] [0083]. For claim 11, see [0083] and associated figures. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the electronic device art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include such ability to scan a shopping cart, and removably attach mobile device to capture device, as shown in Sonnendofer, where this is beneficial as it makes it possible for wholesale and retail to offer their customers a simple payment system, which is readily used by the same and which can be operated without a large personnel requirement. See Sonnendorfer, [0066], [0258] improved customer loyalty, [0007-9].
Claim(s) 12-16, 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Swartz, Maack, and further in view of U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2010/0262554 to Elliott (“Elliott”).
With regard to claim 12-13, 15-16, Swartz and Maack do not teach claims 12-13, 15-16. Elliott teaches the mobile device with GUI, shopping list maintained in memory and product database, indication of product selection and removal from pending shopping list (see e.g. Fig. 6, [0099-101] [0108] etc.). For claim 13 see e.g. Elliott [0099-103]. For claim 15-16 directional guidance at e.g. Elilliott [0099-103]. For claim 22, see recipes and ingredients list at e.g. [0059-65] [0073-74] [0083-84] etc.. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the device art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Swartz/Maack to include such shopping cart GUI and navigation features, as shown in Elliot, as this provides the added benefit of assisting the shopping identify items they need and how to get them as efficiently as possible. See Elliot.
With regard to claim 14, Swartz further discloses where the mobile app is further configured to execute the instructions to provide a running total cost of all products for which the respective product data has been captured (see e.g. [0098]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5/11/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The examiner has withdrawn the double patenting rejection based on the terminal disclaimed filed.
The examiner has withdrawn the 112(b) rejections based on the amendments.
For the 103 rejections, Applicant argues that the prior art does not teach the mobile device of claim 1. The examiner respectfully disagrees. As found above, Swartz teaches this at: a first data acquisition assembly configured to capture, via a mobile device associated with a customer, customer data associated with the customer (see e.g. [0088-89] card reader (a first data acquisition assembly) that reads card (mobile device) associated with customer. The card is a “mobile device” as claimed in that it is mobile, and it is a device as, in Swartz [0088] “a customer is provided with a customer card 210 having encoded customer data stored thereon.” This isn’t just a card. It’s a card with encoded information stored therein. When the card is read, this facilitates the capturing of, Swartz [009], “A card reader on the entrance unit 220 reads the information stored on the card and checks with the central storage system to confirm that a corresponding customer data file exists and that the customer is authorized to use the system.” Accordingly, the card with encoded information of the customer fully satisfies the claimed “mobile device” of claim 1. All that’s recited is “a mobile device associated with a customer.” The card that is unique to the customer, with encoded data, fully satisfies this limitation. For the mobile device as a mobile phone device, see the various dependent claims where that is addressed.). For a dictionary definition, see definition of “mobile” as “capable of moving or being moved”; see also “device” as “a piece of equipment of a mechanism designed to serve a special purpose or perform a special function.” See attached. The card, that is capable of being moved in a pocket, and further the card being a device in that it has encoded data stored thereon that is capable of being used within a wireless transaction, for instance, fully satisfies the term “mobile device.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Peter Ludwig whose telephone number is (571)270-5599. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9-5.
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.
/PETER LUDWIG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627
Prosecution Insights