Part III DETAILED ACTION
1. The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. This application has been examined. This application has been examined. Claims 1-20 are pending in this application.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the claims at issue are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
2. Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as
being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 9,830,115. Although the claims at issue are
not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both claims 1-20 of the instant
application and claims 1-20 of ‘115 are drawn to similar invention as to redirecting or managing
(e.g. distribution, managing or transmission) of data to wired and/or wireless destinations. e.g. claim 1
of the instant application recites teaches an information logistics system requiring no alteration of a
transaction generating device (reads on the redirection (managing or logistics) system of claim 1
of ‘115), comprising: a first device generating information output in at least one of a wired and
wireless mode (reads on the point of sale computer of claim 1 of ‘115 that generating printout);
and a logistics device (or printout redirector of claim 1 of ‘115) configured to receive the
generated information from the first device, the logistics device in at least one of wired and wireless
communication to one or more targeted destination devices, wherein the generated information from
the first device is automatically forwarded to the one or more targeted destination devices by the
logistics device (reads on claim 1 of ‘115, that receives data generated from a first point of sale
computer and transmit (or communicates) the data directly (equal to automatically) through the
internet to a wired or wireless device such as a printer as suggested by claim 1 of ‘115).
Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other
because features of claim 1 of the instant application are clearly covered by the limitations in the
claim 1 of the patent ‘115. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of
the invention to combine the features and limitations of claim 1 of '115 to create the information
logistics (or managing) system of the instant application, thereby creating a system (or method) to
manage (or redirect) information received and transmitting it to different location without modifications
or alternations.
With regard to claims 2-20, the limitations of claims 2-20 are covered by the limitations of claims 2-20 of ‘115. Clearly, a second computer or network device could be a server.
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.
(a) the invention was known or used by others in this country, or patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country, before the invention thereof by the applicant for a patent.
3. Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lewis (7,583,401).
With regard to claim 1, Lewis teaches an information logistics system (or distribution information) requiring no alteration of a transaction generating device (e.g. a copies are stored and move from one site to another without alteration (see col. 4, lines 4-14), comprising: a first device information (212) output in at least one of a wired and wireless mode (see col. 10, lines 57-66); and a logistics device (110) configured to receive the generated information from the first device (222), the logistics device in at least one of wired and wireless communication to one or more targeted destination devices (reads on col.10, lines 57-66 and fig. 2, different devices can be target that are connected by wired or wirelessly), wherein the generated information from the first device is automatically forwarded to the one or more targeted destination devices by the logistics device (reads on col.10, lines 57-66 and fig. 2) .
With regard to claim 2, Lewis further teaches wherein the first device is at least one of a printer, payment terminal, computer, mobile smart phone, and point-of-sale (POS) device disposed in at least one of an office, home, retail space, financial institution, government institution, restaurant, and transportation vehicle (reads on fig. 2, items within 240).
With regard to claim 3, Lewis further teaches wherein a target-destination information is originated from a software program resident on the logistics device (reads on replication application that can be run on any device that can establish link to the network).
With regard to claim 4, Lewis further teaches wherein the generated information is forwarded to the one or more targeted destination devices through an intermediate network, connected to both the first device and the logistics device (reads on fig. 1, which depicts different devices connected using a first network and a second (or intermediate network to search other devices).
With regard to claim 5, Lewis further teaches wherein the intermediate network (or second network) nis the Internet, wherein the generated information is serviced by servers (or replicating devices) in a Cloud (or data base).
With regard to claim 6, Lewis further teaches wherein the generated information from the firstdevice is in at least one of digital and analog form containing at least one of a receipt, rebate,ticket, invoice, image, video, media, email, SMS, coupon, music, financial information, gift card,refund, money transaction, block chain, token, cryptocurrency, bitcoin, login information, software command, and GPS (reads on col. 5, lines 10-15, col. 9, lines 60-64 and col. 11, lines 20-23).
With regard to claim 7, Lewis further teaches wherein the logistics device contains a wireless transceiver and utilizes at least one of short range and long range protocols, and is at least one of a computer, a smart phone, and a software programing running on a digital device (inherently reads on fig. 2, which allow the truck to receive short or long range signal(s)).
With regard to claim 8, Lewis further teaches wherein a target-destination information for the logistics device is obtained via at least one of the first device, a data reader, voice command, an app, and a third device (reads on figs. 3 and , information is shared between devices using an application).
With regard to claim 9, Lewis further teaches wherein third device is at least one of a traffic navigation, location sensing, security, medical, and financial information device (reads on the truck navigation of fig. 3).
With regard to claim 10, Lewis further teaches wherein the first device is at least one of a payment terminal and a transaction terminal (reads on fig. 2, item 253 acts as a transaction terminal).
With regard to claim 11, Lewis further teaches wherein the first device is located in a mode of transportation and information is tabulated with printout information (reads on the truck transaction that can generate a print out receipt of fig. 3).
. With regard to claim 12, Lewis further teaches at least one of a financial service and bank connected to the intermediate network, wherein the generated information is settlement information including an amount of refund due to a transacting party, the amount being transmitted to the at least one financial service and bank (reads figs. 2-4 and col. 9, lines 62-64).
With regard to claim 13, Lewis further teaches wherein the generated information is in an encrypted form prior to transmission or decrypted form after receipt (reads on col. 13, lines 27-37, encryption may be required, also for credit cards transactions).
With regard to claim 14, Lewis further teaches wherein the logistics device is utilized in an existing financial payment transaction processing system (reads on col. 5, lines 10-15, col. 9, lines 60-64 and col. 11, lines 20-23, financial payment such as credit cards transactions).
With regard to claim 15, Lewis further teaches wherein the generated information is forwarded in at least one of a format as an email, text message, and facsimile to a recipient device connected to at least one of an internet network and cell phone network (reads on col. 5, line 62 thru col.6, line 5 and col. 14, line 57, and col. 10, lines 15, line 7).
With regard to claim 16, Lewis further teaches wherein the generated information is in a form of at least one of a musical data file, voice data file, image file and video data file (reads on col. 5, line 62 thru col.6, line 5, and 32-35) .
With regard to claim 17, Lewis further teaches wherein the generated information is output to the logistics device via a wired data port (reads on col.10, lines 57-66 and fig. 2, different devices can be target that are connected by wired or wirelessly).
With regard to claim 18, Lewis further teaches wherein at least one of a time stamp, date, activity location, activity code, and merchant number is in the generated information and a servicing computer connected to the logistics device validates the generated information as authentic (reads on col. 5, lines 4-15).
With regard to claims 19-20, the limitation and features of claims 19-20 are covered by the features of claims 1-18 above.
3. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
White (2005/0277431) teaches a system and method for managing wireless data communications.
Lazaridis et al. (2001/0013071) teaches a system and method for pushing information from a host system to a mobile data communication device.
Shirato et al. (JP2004078359) teaches a network device and device sharing method.
4. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
examiner should be directed to Gabriel I. Garcia whose telephone number is (571)
272-7434. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday from 7:30 AM-6:00 PM.. The fax
phone number for this group is (571) 273-8600.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's
supervisor, Benny Tieu can be reached on (571) 272-7490. 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 the Patent
Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published
applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status
information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For
more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you
have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business
Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO
Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call
800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application should be
directed to the Group receptionist whose telephone number is (571) 272-2600.
/Gabriel I Garcia/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2682
February 05, 2026