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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s “Response to Amendment and Reconsideration” filed on 02/04/2026 has been considered.
Applicant’s response by virtue of amendment to claim(s) 34 has NOT overcome the Examiner’s rejection under 35 USC § 112 paragraph (necessitated by amendment).
Applicant’s response by virtue of amendment to claim(s) 19-38 have NOT overcome the Examiner’s rejection under 35 USC § 101.
Claim(s) 1-18 are cancelled.
Claim(s) 19-38 are added.
Claim(s) 19-38 are pending in this application and an action on the merits follows.
Specification
The specification and Abstract filed on 02/04/2026 has been accepted.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 34 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 34 is an independent claim having a computer that performs the method of claim 30 “A non-transitory computer-readable medium having a program stored thereon for causing a computer to perform the method of claim 30”, claim 30 is “A method for inventory monitoring, using the system of claim 19”. Since claim 30 uses the system of claim 19, it is unclear if the claim 34 that performs the method of claim 30 also uses the system of claim 19. Therefore, the scope of claim 34 is unclear.
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.
Claim(s) 19-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more and thus do not satisfy the criteria for subject matter eligibility.
Step 1
Claim(s) 19, 30, 34 fall(s) in two of the four statutory categories of invention.
Step 2A Prong One: Yes
Claims 19, 30 and 34 limitations:
A system for inventory monitoring,
claims 30 and 34: arranging the first
claims 30 and 34: transferring the digital data set
The limitations of claims 19, 30, 34 recite concepts of transferring data, which fall into the grouping of Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity. The claim language recites: transferring data and arranging a tag, and thus are concepts considered commercial and fundamental economic practice known in the inventory business.
Claims 19-38 recite an abstract idea.
Step 2A Prong Two
The identified additional elements are:
Claim 19: “a furniture part; a good which is spatially separate from the furniture part, a mobile terminal; and smart tags for identification of the good, wherein: a first smart tag of the smart tags is arranged on the furniture part without any good attached to the first smart tag; the furniture part includes a data transfer module integrally formed with the furniture part; and”
Claims 30 and 34: first smart tag on the furniture part, from the data transfer module to the mobile terminal.
The claimed additional elements that perform limitations A and C are claimed at a high level of generality and are considered merely data transmitted, and thus are considered mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer. The claimed additional elements that perform limitation B is claimed at a high level of generally and is considered arranging a tag on a furniture without the recitation of a technical improvement.
Even when viewed in combination, the additional elements represent no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exception on a computer. It can also be viewed as nothing more than an attempt to generally link the use of the judicial exception to the technological environment of computers, and the claims 19, 30, 34 are directed to the judicial exception.
Claims 19-38 are directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B
Claims 19-38 are not including additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed with respect to Step 2A Prong Two, to generally “apply” the abstract idea in a generic or general-purpose computer, and generally links the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use, and do not show significant more.
In addition, Examiner takes Official Notices that is old and well known in the art to have furniture parts with a first smart tag with goods that have smart tags, and are separated from the furniture parts, and with electronic module(s) integrated in the furniture part to transmit data.
In addition, the courts have found computer functions claimed at high level of generality as not sufficient to show an improvement in computer-functionality (see MPEP 2106.05(a)), and well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions (see MPEP 2106.05(d)), applying or using the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception - see MPEP 2106.05(e)
Even when viewed as a whole, nothing in the claims adds significantly more to the abstract idea.
Claims 19-38 are not patent eligible.
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 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.
Claim(s) 19, 21-24, 27-29, 30, 34-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reuther et al. (US 20160283898 A1, hereinafter Reuther) in view of Frees et al. (US 7541931 B1, hereinafter Freed), and further in view of Moreno et al. (US 20210304862 A1, hereinafter Moreno).
Regarding claim(s) 19, 30, 34 Reuther discloses:
Claim1: “A system for inventory monitoring, the system comprising:”; Claim 30:“A method for inventory monitoring, using the system of claim 19, the method comprising:” claim 34: “34. (New) A non-transitory computer-readable medium having a program stored thereon for causing a computer to perform the method of claim 30.” Figures 1-5;
a furniture part; ([0020] Filling device and Figure 1)
a good which is spatially separate from the furniture part, ([0021] merchandise elements including consumer products – consumables and Figure 1- see filling device 103 with compartments 116);
a mobile terminal; and ([0038] portable user equipment and Figure 1);
smart tags for identification of the good, ([0022] RFID tag and Figure 1;)
wherein: a first smart tag of the smart tags is arranged on [merchandise elements] ([0022] RFID tag and Figure 1;)
the furniture part includes a data transfer module; and ([0020]-[0022][0073] RFID reading device 120 and Figure 1 – RFID tag 118);
the data transfer module is configured to transfer, to the mobile terminal, a digital data set relating to the first smart tag. Claim 30 “transferring the digital data set from the data transfer module to the mobile terminal.” ([0073] “determine how many third merchandise elements 107 are present in the compartments 116 and at which positions… result can be transmitted…control device 114”; [0054]-[0055] change of the stock may be measured by detector devices and transmitted to the control device [0073]-[0075] such merchandise elements with RFID tags mounted in the filling devices; [0036][0077] operator uses the user equipment to recall current stock or to control order and re-order);
Reuther discloses RFID tags on merchandise elements are read by a RFID reader 120 and quantities of merchandise elements are sent to control device via 157 link; but does disclose a first smart tag is arranged on the furniture part without any good attached to the first smart tag; claim 30 “arranging the first smart tag on the furniture part; and”
Freed discloses: 5:20-35 “the originator 218 loading the RPC 200 can attach the durable RFID tag 202 to the RPC 200.”; and Figures 2-4; 6:15-30 “The durable RFID tag 202 can be programmable (such as the Alien Technology "Squiggle" Tag) that allows at least a portion of the data output or read from the durable RFID tag to be changed. Reprogramming the durable RFID tag 202 allows the durable RFID tag to be used with many different types of contents 220. By way of example, in a first shipment cycle, the RPC 200 can be used to pack and ship broccoli and the durable RFID) tag 202 can be programmed to identify that the current contents contain broccoli and/or a quantity, weight, an order number, a catalog number, or other descriptive data as may be desired. In a subsequent shipment cycle, the contents 220 of the RPC 200 can be various colors and sizes of men's crew socks and the durable RFID tag 202 can be programmed to identify the current contents (e.g., various colors and sizes of crew socks).”; 6:30-41 “The durable RFID tag 202 can be read numerous times during distribution of the RPC 200 to allow tracking of the RPC while in transit.”
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Reuther to include the above limitations as taught by Freed, in order to a less expensive more flexible system and method for using RFIDs to identify and track the RPCs and their contents, see Freed 2:1-5.
Reuther discloses RFID reading device 120 is mounted on the filling devices, see par. 22; however, does not disclose RFID reading device 120 is “integrally formed with the furniture part”.
Moreno discloses par. 34, 73, 79 Figures 2-4a integrated RFID antenna with RF shielding may on the walls of each compartment of a drawer;
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Reuther to include the above limitations as taught by Moreno, in order to only items within a single compartment to be read at a single time by the antenna, see Moreno para. 79.
Regarding claim(s) 21, Reuther discloses:
wherein at least one of the smart tags is a Radio-Frequency Identification (RFID) chip or a Near Field Communication (NFC) tag. (RFID tag 118 and [0020]-[0022][0073]-[0075])
Regarding claim(s) 22, Reuther discloses:
wherein the data transfer module is further configured to: identify all of the smart tags arranged on the furniture part by communicating with all of the smart tags arranged on the furniture part; transfer, to the mobile terminal, exactly one digital data set relating to all of the smart tags arranged on the furniture part collectively; transfer, to the mobile terminal, iteratively, digital data sets relating to exactly one smart tag arranged on the furniture part; store the digital data set in a buffer integrated in the data transfer module; initiate transfer of the digital data set upon a query through the mobile terminal; or initiate transfer of the digital data set when a connection to the mobile terminal is established or when a number of the smart tags arranged on the furniture part changes. ([0073] the RFID reading device 120 determine precisely how many third merchandise elements 107 are present in the compartments 116; the result is transmit to the control device 114 via wireless; [0064]-[0066] the system retrieves inventory periodically but also in response to a user request (mobile device / end user / user equipment), operator of a S merchandise planning and control management system always have inventory availability (or stock) of a plurality of subsidiaries; the advantage, that a complete inventory of stock at hand (or stock portfolio) may be enabled across all the filling devices down to the level of merchandise elements. Further [0075]-[0077] the control device determines a current stock of filling devices 101-104 with merchandise elements 105-108 using the sensor data of the current stock and re-order is display to the operator via input / output or latter via mobile device by retrieve the data (see para. 64-66, 77 mobile device);
Regarding claim(s) 23, Reuther discloses:
wherein the mobile terminal is a smartphone, a tablet or a computer. ([0036][0077] smartphone);
Regarding claim(s) 24, Reuther discloses:
wherein the mobile terminal is configured to visualize the digital data set or categorize the smart tags based on the digital data set. ([0064]-[0077] the operator uses mobile device to display data (current stock and re-order))
Regarding claim(s) 27, Reuther discloses:
wherein the data transfer module includes: a radio receiver for identification of the first smart tag; or a radio transmitter for transmission of the digital data set. ([0020]-[0022][0073] RFID reading device 120 and Figure 1 – RFID tag 118 [0062] RFID reader includes a antenna);
Regarding claim(s) 28, Reuther discloses:
wherein the furniture part includes a separator for the smart tags. (Figure 1 - he third filling device 103 includes compartments that separates smart tags 118 on merchandise elements 107)
Regarding claim(s) 29, Reuther discloses:
wherein the data transfer module is integrated at least in an area in the furniture part or arranged inside the furniture part.(Figure 1 - RFID reading device 120 is integrated in the third filling device)
Regarding claim(s) 35, Reuther discloses:
wherein the furniture part is movable. (Figure 1 - a third filling device 103 has five compartments 116 is movable;)
Regarding claim(s) 36, Reuther discloses:
wherein the furniture part is a drawer. (Figure 1 - filling device can be a drawer)
Regarding claim(s) 37, Reuther does not disclose wherein the first smart tag is arranged directly on the furniture part.
Freed discloses: 5:20-35 “the originator 218 loading the RPC 200 can attach the durable RFID tag 202 to the RPC 200.”; and Figures 2-4; 6:15-30 “The durable RFID tag 202 can be programmable (such as the Alien Technology "Squiggle" Tag) that allows at least a portion of the data output or read from the durable RFID tag to be changed. Reprogramming the durable RFID tag 202 allows the durable RFID tag to be used with many different types of contents 220. By way of example, in a first shipment cycle, the RPC 200 can be used to pack and ship broccoli and the durable RFID) tag 202 can be programmed to identify that the current contents contain broccoli and/or a quantity, weight, an order number, a catalog number, or other descriptive data as may be desired. In a subsequent shipment cycle, the contents 220 of the RPC 200 can be various colors and sizes of men's crew socks and the durable RFID tag 202 can be programmed to identify the current contents (e.g., various colors and sizes of crew socks).”; 6:30-41 “The durable RFID tag 202 can be read numerous times during distribution of the RPC 200 to allow tracking of the RPC while in transit.”
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Reuther to include the above limitations as taught by Freed, in order to a less expensive more flexible system and method for using RFIDs to identify and track the RPCs and their contents, see Freed 2:1-5.
Claim(s) 20, 26, 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reuther, Frees, Moreno combination as applied to claims 19 and 30, and further in view of Official Notice.
Regarding claim(s) 20 and 26, the combination, specifically Reuther does not disclose that further comprising a switch, a router or a cloud for transfer of the digital data set and wherein the mobile terminal is configured to transfer the data to a cloud. Examiner takes Official Notice that having a switch, a router and/or a cloud for transfer of data and mobile device transferring data to a cloud are old and well-known method of data transferring between computing devices.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Reuther to include a switch, a router and/or a cloud in the communication architecture and having the mobile device transferring digital data set to the cloud of Reuther as taught by Official Notice, in order to structured, efficient, scalable, and secure system for communication.
Regarding claim(s) 32, the combination, specifically Reuther discloses:
further comprising, based on the digital data set, on the mobile terminal, via an application for monitoring the smart tags, identifying, one of the smart tags which is identified with the good or programmed for identification with the good; visualizing the digital data set or categorizing the smart tags based on the digital data set; creating a shopping list based on the digital data set; or generating a data analysis of the digital data set. ([0023]-[0030] the trigger of a re-order is based of the current stock deviate from a predetermined nominal stock threshold value, where the threshold value is determine using historical data, sale rate data of merchandise elements that are still available in the filling device and will be withdrawn in the near future; a human operator can be notify fort he re-order; Further [0075]-[0077] the control device determines a current stock of filling devices 101-104 with merchandise elements 105-108 using the sensor data of the current stock and re-order is display to the operator via input / output or latter via mobile device by retrieve the data (see para. 64-66, 77 mobile device); Figure 1 and 2)
The combination, specifically Reuther does not disclose that stored on the mobile terminal or in a cloud, after transfer of the digital data set from the mobile terminal into the cloud. Examiner takes Official Notice that having a mobile device transferring data to a cloud or the data stored in the mobile device are old and well-known method of storing data and transferring data.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Reuther to include a mobile device transferring data to a cloud or to have the data stored in the mobile device of Reuther as taught by Official Notice, in order to structured, efficient, scalable, and secure system for communication.
Claim(s) 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reuther, Frees, Moreno combination as applied to claim 19, and further in view of Jain et al. (US 20090307080 A1, hereinafter Jain).
Regarding claim(s) 25, the combination, specifically Reuther discloses:
wherein the mobile terminal is configured to create [re-order] a based on the digital data set. [0064]-[0077] the operator uses mobile device to display data (current stock and re-order), and [0056] Orders and shopping baskets may be prepared respectively revised by the user, i.e. proposed re-ordering processes may be accepted, changed or rejected by an operator
The combination does not disclose re-order as shopping list
Jain discloses: [0025][0026] “Continuing with example from 202, when a consumer discovers that a product at his house is empty, or near empty, the consumer, via the handheld device, may scan (e.g. via reading an RFID tag, via reading a barcode, or via photographing a barcode) the empty or near empty product. The empty or near empty product may be entered into a shopping list on the handheld device”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the combination to include the above limitations as taught by Jain, in order to have the benefit of knowing if there is a coupon or not for the products in the shopping list, see Jain para. 25-26.
Claim(s) 31, 33, 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reuther, Frees, Moreno combination as applied to claim 30, and further in view of Philippe et al. (US 20100134251 A1, hereinafter Philippe).
Regarding claim(s) 31 and 38, the combination, specifically Reuther discloses:
transferring the digital data set from the data transfer module to the mobile terminal. ([0073] the RFID reading device 120 determine precisely how many third merchandise elements 107 are present in the compartments 116; the result is transmit to the control device 114 via wireless; [0064]-[0066] the system retrieves inventory periodically but also in response to a user request (mobile device / end user / user equipment), [0075]-[0077] the control device determines a current stock of filling devices 101-104 with merchandise elements 105-108 using the sensor data of the current stock and re-order is display to the operator via input / output or latter via mobile device by retrieve the data (see para. 64-66, 77 mobile device);
The combination does not disclose further comprising: removing the first smart tag from the furniture part; and claim 38 “wherein the first smart tag is removable from the furniture part.”
Philippe discloses: [0022] If provisions are received 140, the method continues with rotating remaining products from the secondary bin to the primary bin, and replenishing 145 the secondary 220 bin (and optionally the primary bin 210). Upon completing the rotation and replenishing of the primary 210 and secondary bins 220, the corresponding RFID tag 230 is removed from the provisioning board 240 and replaced 150 on the corresponding bin”;
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the combination to include the above limitations as taught by Philippe, in order to improve bins replenishment, see Philippe para. 8.
Regarding claim(s) 33, Reuther discloses:
further comprising, based on the data analysis: creating a statistical evaluation of the digital data set; visualizing, on the mobile terminal, advertising adapted to the digital data set; or relaying the digital data set to a production facility or a sales facility. ([0023]-[0030] the trigger of a re-order is based of the current stock deviate from a predetermined nominal stock threshold value, where the threshold value is determine using historical data, sale rate data of merchandise elements that are still available in the filling device and will be withdrawn in the near future; a human operator can be notify fort he re-order; Further [0075]-[0077] the control device determines a current stock of filling devices 101-104 with merchandise elements 105-108 using the sensor data of the current stock and re-order is display to the operator via input / output or latter via mobile device by retrieve the data (see para. 64-66, 77 mobile device); Figure 1 and 2)
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the newly add claim(s) 19-28 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection necessitated by applicant’s new claims.
Regarding the specification
Applicant’s argues that the claimed invention is not directed to the abstracted idea, see Remarks page 10. Examiner respectfully disagrees. The claimed invention is directed to arranging a first smart tag on the furniture and transferring a digital data set related to the first smart tag; therefore, the claimed invention fall into the grouping of Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity, and recite abstract idea.
Applicant’s argues that the claimed invention is so integrated that the combination of additional elements reflects a technical improvement of inventory monitoring, see Remarks page 11. Examiner respectfully disagrees. The claimed inventio is directed to a first smart tag arranged on furniture and data related from the smart tag are read and transmit. Reading data from a smart tag arrange in a furniture and transmitting that data to a mobile device does not reflects a technical improvement of inventory monitoring.
Therefore, the rejection under the 35 USC 101 are maintained.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VANESSA DELIGI whose telephone number is (571)272-0503. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 07:30AM-5PM.
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, Florian (Ryan) Zeender can be reached on (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 an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/VANESSA DELIGI/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3627
/FLORIAN M ZEENDER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3627
Prosecution Insights