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 .
Remarks
Claims 1-17 are pending.
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 4 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by DeCelles et al. (‘DeCelles’ hereinafter) (Publication Number 20150302417).
As per claim 4, DeCelles teaches
A method performed in a server device associated with a provider of a product for provisioning a content related to the product to a user device, wherein an electronic label is attached to a package of the product, the method comprising: (see abstract, background, and summary)
receiving a signal sent from the electronic label upon breaking of a seal of the electronic label; determining a content related to the product based on information associated to the electronic label; (send message to backend system when sensor indicates container is opened, paragraphs [0005], [0030]-[0031]; sensor connected to processor and memory that stores profile which uniquely identifies the container and contents, paragraph [0065], where sensor connected to memory with profile identifying container and contents reads on electronic label)
and sending the determined content to the user device. (backend system sends message to user device using contact information from search for customer records, paragraph [0066]; message from backend system to user device can include customer information and notifications, paragraphs [0038]-[0039], where customer information and notifications read on determined information)
As per claim 12, DeCelles teaches
A server device associated with a provider of a product for provisioning a content related to the product to a user device, wherein an electronic label is attached to a package of the product, the server device being configured to perform the method according to claim 4. (see rejection of claim 4, 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.
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 1-3, 5-7, 9-10 and 13-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DeCelles et al. (‘DeCelles’ hereinafter) (Publication Number 20150302417) in view of Toksoz et al. (‘Toksoz’ hereinafter) (Publication Number 20210216614).
As per claim 1, DeCelles teaches
A method performed in a system for provisioning and installing a content related to a product, wherein the system comprises a server device associated with a provider of the product, a user device associated with a receiver of the product, an electronic label attached to a package of the product, and wherein the content related to the product is provided by the server device to the user device, the method comprising: (see abstract, background, and summary; see also Toksoz, below, who teaches installing an application @ paragraph [0026])
sending, by the electronic label to the server device, a signal upon breaking of a seal of the electronic label; (send message to backend system when sensor indicates container is opened, paragraphs [0005], [0030]-[0031]; sensor connected to processor and memory that stores profile which uniquely identifies the container and contents, paragraph [0065], where sensor connected to memory with profile identifying container and contents reads on electronic label)
receiving, by the server device, the signal sent from the electronic label; (backend system receives signal, paragraph [0038]; messages sent to backend server when processor determined container opened from sensor, paragraphs [0064]-[0066])
determining, by the server device, a content related to the product based on information associated to the electronic label; (messages received at backend system can include profile such as container ID and backend system can search based on this information, paragraph [0066])
sending, by the server device, the determined content to the user device; (backend system sends message to user device using contact information from search for customer records, paragraph [0066]; message from backend system to user device can include customer information and notifications, paragraphs [0038]-[0039], where customer information and notifications read on determined information).
DeCelles does not explicitly indicate “installing, by the user device, the content related to the product to the user device”.
However, Toksoz discloses “installing, by the user device, the content related to the product to the user device” (download and install application, paragraphs [0024],[0029],[0034]-[0035]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine DeCelles and Toksoz because using the steps claimed would have given those skilled in the art the tools to improve the invention by providing a way to authenticate users in order to, for example, customize applications or provide custom content for particular users (see Toksoz, paragraph [0001]). This gives the user the advantage of having a more install of applications.
As per claim 2,
DeCelles does not explicitly indicate “the content is an application or media related to the product, a brand image of the product or any information related to the product to be used by the receiver of the product or to be installed or loaded to the user device”.
However, Toksoz discloses “the content is an application or media related to the product, a brand image of the product or any information related to the product to be used by the receiver of the product or to be installed or loaded to the user device” (download and install application, paragraphs [0024],[0029],[0034]-[0035]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine DeCelles and Toksoz because using the steps claimed would have given those skilled in the art the tools to improve the invention by providing a way to authenticate users in order to, for example, customize applications or provide custom content for particular users (see Toksoz, paragraph [0001]). This gives the user the advantage of having a more install of applications.
As per claim 3, DeCelles teaches
A system for provisioning and installing a content related to a product, wherein the system comprises a server device associated with a provider of the product, a user device associated with a receiver of the product and an electronic label attached to a package of the product, and wherein the content related to the product is provided by the server device to the user device, the system being configured to perform the method according to claim 1. (see rejection of claim 1, above)
As per claim 5,
DeCelles does not explicitly indicate “the content is an application or media related to the product, a brand image of the product or any information related to the product to be used by the receiver of the product or to be installed or loaded to the user device”.
However, Toksoz discloses “the content is an application or media related to the product, a brand image of the product or any information related to the product to be used by the receiver of the product or to be installed or loaded to the user device” (download and install application, paragraphs [0024],[0029],[0034]-[0035]; note that DeCelles also teaches that message to user device can include notifications/prompts to launch customer service, see DeCelles, paragraph [0038]-[0039]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine DeCelles and Toksoz because using the steps claimed would have given those skilled in the art the tools to improve the invention by providing a way to authenticate users in order to, for example, customize applications or provide custom content for particular users (see Toksoz, paragraph [0001]). This gives the user the advantage of having a more install of applications.
As per claim 6, DeCelles teaches
determining a content related to the product based on the information associated to the electronic label comprises looking up in a data base comprising contact information of the receiver of the product, information on the user device, product specifications and product related applications, media or information. (customer record stored in CRM system, paragraph [0037]; in the alternative, the contact information is nonfunctional descriptive material and not functionally involved in the steps recited. The steps would have been performed the same regardless of the content of the contact information. Thus, this descriptive material will not distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art in terms of patentability, see In re Gulack, 703 F.2d 1381, 1385, 217 USPQ 401, 404 (Fed. Cir. 1983); In re Lowry, 32 F.3d 1579, 32 USPQ2d 1031 (Fed. Cir. 1994). See MPEP 2106.05(g). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to receive any type of information because such data does not functionally relate to the steps claimed and because the subjective interpretation of the data does not patentably distinguish the claimed invention).
As per claim 7, DeCelles teaches
the contact information of the receiver of the product comprises any one of the following: a) Internet Protocol, IP, address of the user device; b) subscriber or telephone number of the user device; c) email address of the receiver of the product; and the information on the user device comprises the type and operating platform of the user device. (customer record can store IP address and the like, paragraph [0037]; in the alternative, the contact information is nonfunctional descriptive material and not functionally involved in the steps recited. The steps would have been performed the same regardless of the content of the contact information. Thus, this descriptive material will not distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art in terms of patentability, see In re Gulack, 703 F.2d 1381, 1385, 217 USPQ 401, 404 (Fed. Cir. 1983); In re Lowry, 32 F.3d 1579, 32 USPQ2d 1031 (Fed. Cir. 1994). See MPEP 2106.05(g). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to receive any type of information because such data does not functionally relate to the steps claimed and because the subjective interpretation of the data does not patentably distinguish the claimed invention).
As per claim 9, DeCelles teaches
obtaining additional information of the receiver of the product on any one of the following: a) other devices that are associated with the receiver of the product and need to use or install the product related content; b) IP address of the other devices; c) types and operating platforms of the other devices; d) pairing codes, Postal Index Number, PIN codes, or digital certificates of the user device and/or other devices for device-to-device connection. (customer record can store IP address and the like, paragraph [0037]; in the alternative, the contact information is nonfunctional descriptive material and not functionally involved in the steps recited. The steps would have been performed the same regardless of the content of the contact information. Thus, this descriptive material will not distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art in terms of patentability, see In re Gulack, 703 F.2d 1381, 1385, 217 USPQ 401, 404 (Fed. Cir. 1983); In re Lowry, 32 F.3d 1579, 32 USPQ2d 1031 (Fed. Cir. 1994). See MPEP 2106.05(g). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to receive any type of information because such data does not functionally relate to the steps claimed and because the subjective interpretation of the data does not patentably distinguish the claimed invention).
As per claim 10, DeCelles teaches
sending a message to the user device to request the information on the user device and additional information of the receiver of the product from the user device or to request a permission to fetch or extract the information on the user device and the additional information of the receiver of the product from a web server or a user account stored in a cloud or a network node in a wireless communication network. (receive message from backend system with notification to prompt customer to execute customer service application, paragraphs [0038]-[0040])
As per claim 13, DeCelles teaches
A method performed in a user device associated with a receiver of a product for installing a content related to the product, wherein an electronic label is attached to a package of the product and the content related to the product is any one of an application related to the product, media related to the product, a brand image of the product or any information related to the product to be used by the receiver of the product or to be installed or loaded to the user device, the method comprising: (see abstract, background, and summary; see also Toksoz, below, who teaches installing an application @ paragraph [0026])
receiving a message from a server device associated with a provider of the product upon breaking of a seal of the electronic label, (send message to backend system when sensor indicates container is opened, paragraphs [0005], [0030]-[0031]; sensor connected to processor and memory that stores profile which uniquely identifies the container and contents, paragraph [0065], where sensor connected to memory with profile identifying container and contents reads on electronic label)
wherein the message comprises any one or a combination of: a) a question if the receiver of the product needs help for starting up the product, b) a link to the content related to the product, c) a request to obtain information on the user device and/or additional information of the receiver of the product, or d) a requiring if the server device is allowed to fetch or extract information on the user device and/or additional information of the receiver of the product from a web server or a user account stored in a cloud or a network node in a wireless communication network; (messages received at backend system can include profile such as container ID and backend system can search based on this information, paragraph [0066])
responding the received message based on what kind of message has been received; (backend system sends message to user device using contact information from search for customer records, paragraph [0066]; message from backend system to user device can include customer information and notifications, paragraphs [0038]-[0039], where customer information and notifications read on determined information)
DeCelles does not explicitly indicate “installing the content related to the product to the user device”.
However, Toksoz discloses “installing the content related to the product to the user device” (download and install application, paragraphs [0024],[0029],[0034]-[0035]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine DeCelles and Toksoz because using the steps claimed would have given those skilled in the art the tools to improve the invention by providing a way to authenticate users in order to, for example, customize applications or provide custom content for particular users (see Toksoz, paragraph [0001]). This gives the user the advantage of having a more install of applications.
As per claim 14, DeCelles teaches
responding the received message based on what kind of message has been received comprises: downloading the content from the link; or sending the information on the user device and additional information of the receiver of the product to the server device; or giving permission to the server device to fetch or extract the information on the user device and additional information of the receiver of the product from a web server or a user account stored in a cloud or a network node in the wireless communication network. (backend system sends message to user device using contact information from search for customer records, paragraph [0066]; message from backend system to user device can include customer information and notifications, paragraphs [0038]-[0039], where customer information and notifications read on determined information)
As per claim 15, DeCelles teaches
the information on the user device comprises the type and operating platform of the user device and the additional information of receiver of the product comprises any one or a combination of the following: a) other devices that are associated with the receiver of the product and need to use or install the product related content; b) types and operating platforms of the other devices; c) pairing codes of the user device and/or other devices. (sensor connected to processor and memory that stores profile which uniquely identifies the container and contents, paragraph [0065]; note that the information on the user device is nonfunctional descriptive material and not functionally involved in the steps recited. The steps would have been performed the same regardless of the content of the information. Thus, this descriptive material will not distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art in terms of patentability, see In re Gulack, 703 F.2d 1381, 1385, 217 USPQ 401, 404 (Fed. Cir. 1983); In re Lowry, 32 F.3d 1579, 32 USPQ2d 1031 (Fed. Cir. 1994). See MPEP 2106.05(g). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to receive any type of information because such data does not functionally relate to the steps claimed and because the subjective interpretation of the data does not patentably distinguish the claimed invention).
As per claim 16, DeCelles teaches
A user device associated with a receiver of a product for installing a content related to the product, the user device being configured to perform the method according to claim 13. (see rejection of claim 13, above)
As per claim 17, DeCelles teaches
the electronic label is a Narrow Band Internet of Things, NB-IoT label, or any label with wireless communication capability via any existing wireless communication network. (paragraph [0031])
Claims 8 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DeCelles et al. (‘DeCelles’ hereinafter) (Publication Number 20150302417) in view of Toksoz et al. (‘Toksoz’ hereinafter) (Publication Number 20210216614) and further in view of Mitchell (Publication Number 20200387923).
As per claim 8,
Neither DeCelles nor Toksoz explicitly indicate “the contact information of the receiver of the product and information on the user device is obtained by a data exchange between the provider and receiver of the product during the purchasing of the product”.
However, Mitchell discloses “the contact information of the receiver of the product and information on the user device is obtained by a data exchange between the provider and receiver of the product during the purchasing of the product” (paragraph [0141]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine DeCelles, Toksoz and Mitchell because using the steps claimed would have given those skilled in the art the tools to improve the invention by providing for real-time exchange of information to ensure that contact information is valid and up-to-date. This gives the user the advantage of being sure of the reliability of information.
As per claim 11, DeCelles teaches
the information on the user device and the additional information of the receiver of the product are obtained by fetching or extracting the information on the user device and the additional information of the receiver of the product from a web server or a user account stored in a cloud or a network node in a wireless communication (send message to backend system when sensor indicates container is opened, paragraphs [0005], [0030]-[0031]; sensor connected to processor and memory that stores profile which uniquely identifies the container and contents, paragraph [0065])
Neither DeCelles nor Toksoz explicitly indicate “under a permission given by the receiver of the product by a data exchange between the provider and receiver of the product during the purchasing of the product”.
However, Mitchell discloses “under a permission given by the receiver of the product by a data exchange between the provider and receiver of the product during the purchasing of the product” (paragraph [0141]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine DeCelles, Toksoz and Mitchell because using the steps claimed would have given those skilled in the art the tools to improve the invention by providing for real-time exchange of information to ensure that contact information is valid and up-to-date. This gives the user the advantage of being sure of the reliability of information.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/13/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejections of claims 4 and 12, applicant argues that “there is no disclosure in DeCelles of an electronic label attached to a package of the product” as recited in claim 4 (applicant arguments, page 8). However, DeCelles teaches a sensor that “can, for example, be integrally formed within an inside surface of container 101, such as embedded in a lid or a supporting wall” or “can be mounted to an inside surface of container” (DeCelles, paragraph [0030]). This sensor reads on the electronic label attached to a package of the product because the sensor is integrally formed within the container or mounted to the inside surface. Therefore, this argument is not convincing.
Applicant further argues that DeCelles does not teach "receiving a signal sent from the electronic label upon breaking of a seal of the electronic label” as recited in claim 4 (applicant arguments, page 8). However, DeCelles teaches that when the sensor detects that the container is opened, a signal is sent to a processor indicating the opening, and that the sensor can be “an ambient light sensor, a motion sensor, and the like” (DeCelles, paragraphs [0005], [0030]-[0031]). The sensor detecting that the container is opened is analogous to the breaking of a seal of the electronic label as claimed. Therefore, this argument is not convincing.
With respect to the remaining claims that are rejected under 35 USC 103, the applicant argues substantially the same limitations and that the additional references do not cure the deficiencies of DeCelles. Since DeCelles does teach the argued limitations as shown above there are no deficiencies in DeCelles. Therefore, these arguments are not convincing.
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 JAY A MORRISON whose telephone number is (571)272-7112. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday, 8:00 am - 4:00 pm ET.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Trujillo K James, can be reached at telephone number (571)272-3677. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center and the Private Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center or Private PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center and Private PAIR for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/Jay A Morrison/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2151