Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 18/595,186

INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, POINT-OF-SALE SYSTEM, AND METHOD

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Mar 04, 2024
Priority
Apr 07, 2023 — JP 2023-062529
Examiner
OBAID, FATEH M
Art Unit
3627
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Toshiba TEC Kabushiki Kaisha
OA Round
2 (Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
1y 0m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 68% — above average
68%
Career Allowance Rate
526 granted / 775 resolved
+15.9% vs TC avg
Strong +35% interview lift
Without
With
+35.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
802
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
15.9%
-24.1% vs TC avg
§103
52.0%
+12.0% vs TC avg
§102
25.8%
-14.2% vs TC avg
§112
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 775 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
1Notice 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 . DETAILED ACTION This communication is in response to the amendments filed on 12/23/2025. Claims 1-4, 7-8, 11-14, 17-18 and 20 have been amended. Claims 5-6, 9-10, 15-16 and 19 have been cancelled. Claims 21-23 have been newly added. Claims 1-4, 7-8, 11-14, 17-18 and 20-23 are currently pending and have been examined. 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. Claims 1-4, 7-8, 11-14, 17-18 and 20-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lewis et al. “US 2009/0037284 A” (Lewis) in view of Ozvat et at. “US 2015/0081462 A1” (Ozvat). Regarding Claim 1: An information processing apparatus for connecting a plurality of peripheral devices to a portable point-of-sale (POS) terminal, the information processing apparatus comprising: a connection interface connectable to the POS terminal and the plurality of peripheral devices; a display; an input interface; and a processor configured to manage communication between the POS terminal and the plurality of peripheral devices that are connected to the connection interface, wherein the processor is further configured to: execute a boot process to start an operating system, upon completion of the boot process or upon detection of an additional peripheral device connected to the connection interface, execute a first application, which causes the display to continuously display a first operation screen in full screen mode before displaying a second operation screen, which is an operation screen of the operating system or any another application installed in the information processing apparatus, the first operation screen preventing any input operation to the operating system or said any other application from being received through the input interface (at least see Lewis Abstract; Figs. 1 and 3; [0007]-[0009] and [0014]-[0015]; note: “[0028] For the purposes of this disclosure, peripheral drivers and peripheral firmware will be referred to individually or collectively as "peripheral operation software". For example, peripheral driver 205 is peripheral operation software, and peripheral firmware 209 is peripheral operation software, associated with peripheral device 106.”), Lewis disclose the claimed invention but fails to explicitly disclose in response to an input operation received through the first operation screen, controlling the display to display an authentication screen in place of the first operation screen, and upon receipt of a predetermined input through the authentication screen, control the display to transition from the authentication screen to the second operation screen. However, Ozvat disclose this (at least see Ozvat Abstract; Figs. 1, 10 and 16; [0162]-[0163]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made (Pre-AIA ) or before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA FITF) to use Ozvat’s teachings in Lewis’s enabled, for the advantage of confirmation to the POS system and possibly the payment processing peripheral device(s) such that the confirmation may be displayed to the purchaser and/or an attendant. Regarding Claim 2: The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to execute the first application immediately after the boot process is complete so that the first operation screen is displayed before the second operation screen through which a setting of the operation system can be changed (at least see Lewis [0019]). Regarding Claim 3: The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to execute the first application immediately after the additional peripheral device is connected to the connection interface so that the first operation screen is displayed before the second operation screen through which an operation for using the additional peripheral device can be input (at least see Lewis [0028]-[0029]). Regarding Claim 4: The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the first operation screen includes a first operation button for restarting the information processing apparatus, a second operation button for shutting down the information processing apparatus, and a third operation button for displaying the authentication screen (at least see Lewis [0021]). (at least see Lewis [0021]). (at least see Lewis Abstract; Fig. 1; [0003]). Regarding Claim 7: The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the connection interface includes a wireless network interface wirelessly connectable to the POS terminal, and an input/output interface connectable to the plurality of peripheral devices (at least see Lewis [0002]). Regarding Claim 8: The information processing apparatus according to claim 7, wherein the processor is configured to cause the display to stop continuously displaying the first operation screen in full screen mode when the additional peripheral device is disconnected from the input/output interface (at least see Lewis [0015]). Regarding Claim 21: The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the processor controls the display to display the first operation screen while managing the communication between the POS terminal and the plurality of peripheral devices (at least see Lewis [0019]-[0024]). Regarding Claims 11-14, 17-18, 20 and 22-23: all limitations as recited have been analyzed and rejected with respect to claims 1-4, 7-8 and 21. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-4, 7-8, 11-14, 17-18 and 20-23 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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. Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FATEH M OBAID whose telephone number is (571)270-7121. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 A.M to 4:30 P.M. 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, Ryan Zeender can be reached at (571) 272-6790. 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. /FATEH M OBAID/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 04, 2024
Application Filed
Oct 02, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103
Dec 23, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 14, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12635816
MODIFIABLE BAGGING STRUCTURE
3y 3m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12639654
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR SIMPLIFIED SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT
2y 0m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12639745
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR END USER VIEW B2B/B2C MODE
1y 6m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12626210
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR TRACKING ASSETS
3y 5m to grant Granted May 12, 2026
Patent 12626223
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR ALLOCATING AN AGV VEHICLE IN A PLANT LOCATION
2y 6m to grant Granted May 12, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
68%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+35.3%)
3y 3m (~1y 0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 775 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month