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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
Acknowledgement is made of Applicant’s Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) form PTO-1149 filed 05/06/2024 & 10/08/2024. These IDS have been considered.
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 1, 5-8, 13, 14, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Buchholz (US 2004/0238629).
Regarding claim 1, Buchholz discloses in at least figures 1 and 4 a system (74) for use at an exit of a retail facility (20) (¶¶ [0013], [0052], [0066]) comprising a scanner (84) proximate the exit of the retail facility (20) and at a separate location than a point of sale checkout station (36) of the retail facility (20), the scanner (84) configured to capture an electronic code associated with a receipt of items purchased at the retail facility (20) (¶¶ [0059], [0066]), a floor scale (78) proximate to and communicationally coupled to the scanner (84), the floor scale (78) configured to weigh a portable carrier (80) containing the items when the portable carrier (80) is positioned on a surface of the floor scale (78) (see figure 4, ¶ [0066]), and a control circuit (33) communicationally coupled to the scanner (84) and the floor scale (78), the control circuit (33) configured to determine whether an estimated total weight of the purchased items associated with the receipt matches within a threshold with an actual weight of the portable carrier (80) received from the floor scale (78) (¶ [0096]).
Regarding claim 5, Buchholz discloses the portable carrier (80) comprises one of a shopping cart (80) or a shopping basket (¶ [0066]).
Regarding claim 6, Buchholz discloses in figure 4 the floor scale (78) is embedded on a floor at the retail facility (20).
Regarding claim 7, Buchholz discloses the electronic code comprises one of a QR code or a barcode (¶ [0066]).
Regarding claim 8, Buchholz discloses an additional floor scale (78) positioned closer to the exit than to the point of sale checkout station (36) and positioned at least one of rearward or alongside of the floor scale (78) (¶ [0066]; see figure 1, two audit stations (74) are positioned side by side near the exit).
Regarding claim 13, Buchholz discloses in figure 4 the scanner (84) is coupled to a fixture (86, 88) mounted proximate to the floor scale (78) (¶ [0067]).
Regarding claim 14, Buchholz discloses a capture of the electronic code by scanner (84) initiates an operation of the floor scale (78) (¶ [0067]).
Regarding claim 17, Buchholz discloses in figures 1 and 4 a method for use at an exit of at a retail facility (20) (¶¶ [0052], [0066]) comprising capturing, by a scanner (84) proximate the exit of the retail facility (20) and at a separate location than a point of sale checkout station (36) of the retail facility (20), an electronic code associated with a receipt of items purchased at the retail facility (20) (¶¶ [0059], [0066], [0096]), weighing, by a floor scale (78) proximate to and communicationally coupled to the scanner (84), a portable carrier (80) containing the items when the portable carrier (80) is positioned on a surface of the floor scale (78) (¶¶ [0066], [0096]) and determining, by a control circuit (33) communicationally coupled to the scanner (84) and the floor scale (78), whether an estimated total weight of the purchased items associated with the receipt matches within a threshold with an actual weight of the portable carrier (80) received from the floor scale (78) (¶ [0096]).
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 2-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buchholz.
Regarding claim 2, Buchholz discloses an indicator (82) configured to display a weight result of the portable carrier (80) (¶¶ [0066], [0096]).
Buchholz further discloses that the circuit makes a determination as to whether estimated total weight of the purchased items associated with the receipt matches within a threshold with an actual weight of the portable carrier but does not explicitly disclose that the display displays the determination result.
However, one having ordinary skill in the art would readily appreciate and infer that upon the determination whether the total weight is within the threshold, it would be obvious for the purpose of allowing the user to know the result of the determination so that the user can then freely leave the facility or wait to consult with an employee for further auditing.
Regarding claim 3, Buchholz discloses or renders obvious the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends.
Buchholz further discloses the indicator (82) comprises one of a light emitting device or a display screen (82) (¶ [0066]).
Regarding claim 4, Buchholz discloses or renders obvious the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends.
Buchholz further discloses the indicator (82) is integrated with the scanner (84) (¶ [0066]; see figure 4).
Claims 9-12, 15, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buchholz in view of Morris (US 2004/0008036; “Morris”).
Regarding claim 9, Buchholz discloses the control circuit (33) that determines whether the estimated total weight of the purchased items associated with the receipt does not match within the threshold with the actual weight of the portable carrier (80) (¶ [0096]) and also discloses an indicator that displays information related to the weight of the portable carrier (80) (¶ [0096]).
Buchholz further discloses that when the two weights do not match within the threshold, an employee should make an item-to-item comparison (¶[0096]).
Buchholz does not explicitly disclose that the indicator conveys an alert when the estimated weight does not match the receipt, though one having ordinary skill in the art could readily appreciated and infer that conveying an alert if there is no match would be obvious in order for an employee to be even made aware that an item-to-item comparison audit needs to be made.
Nevertheless, in the same field of endeavor, Morris teaches a floor scale that weighs a portable carrier full of products and then compares the total carrier weight to predicted weight (¶¶ [0039]-[0040]). Morris further teaches the control circuit is configured to cause an indicator to convey an alert indicating that the estimated total weight of the purchased items associated with the receipt does not match within the threshold with the actual weight of the portable carrier (¶ [0045]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to configure Buchholz’s indicator to convey an alert upon the determination that the measured carrier weight does not match the predicted weight for the purpose of getting the attention of an employee who can then help determine the cause of the discrepancy. This feature provides the benefit of adding order security to the automated shopping system (Morris ¶ [0046]).
Regarding claim 10, Buchholz as modified by Morris discloses all the limitations of claim 9 on which this claim depends.
Morris further teaches the alert is a signal summoning a retail associate to come towards the floor scale (¶ [0045]).
The reasons and motivation for combining are the same as recited in the rejection of claim 9 above.
Regarding claim 11, Buchholz discloses the control circuit (33) that determines whether the estimated total weight of the purchased items associated with the receipt does not match within the threshold with the actual weight of the portable carrier (80) (¶ [0096]) and also discloses an indicator that displays information related to the weight of the portable carrier (80) (¶ [0096]).
Buchholz does not explicitly disclose the control circuit is further configured to cause an indicator to convey a signal indicating that the estimated total weight of the purchased items associated with the receipt matches within the threshold with the actual weight of the portable carrier.
However, one having ordinary skill in the art would readily appreciate and infer that upon the determination that the total weight is within the threshold, it would be obvious for the purpose of allowing the user to know that they can then freely leave the facility.
Nevertheless, in the same field of endeavor, Morris teaches a floor scale that weighs a portable carrier full of products and then compares the total carrier weight to predicted weight (¶¶ [0039]-[0040]). Morris further teaches the control circuit is configured to cause an indicator to convey a signal indicating that the estimated total weight of the purchased items associated with the receipt matches within the threshold with the actual weight of the portable carrier (¶ [0045]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention ton configured Buchholz’s indicator to convey the a signal indicating that the estimated total weight of the purchased items associated with the receipt matches within the threshold with the actual weight of the portable carrier as taught by Morris for purpose of allowing the user to know that they can then freely leave the facility for the benefit of adding order security to the automated shopping system (Morris ¶ [0046]).
Regarding claim 12, Buchholz discloses all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends.
Buchholz is silent to the control circuit is further configured to adjust the threshold in response to the actual weight being outside the threshold relative to the estimated total weight based on at least one of a minimum or a maximum weight of an item in the items purchased associated with the receipt, wherein the item is associated with a category of products whose weight varies substantially from one item to another item of same product.
In the same field of endeavor, Morris teaches a floor scale that weighs a portable carrier full of products and then compares the total carrier weight to predicted weight (¶¶ [0039]-[0040]). Morris further teaches the control circuit is further configured to adjust the threshold in response to the actual weight being outside the threshold relative to the estimated total weight based on at least one of a minimum or a maximum weight of an item in the items purchased associated with the receipt, wherein the item is associated with a category of products whose weight varies substantially from one item to another item of same product (¶¶ [0047]-[0049]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to configure Buchholz’s circuit to adjust the threshold in response to the actual weight being outside the threshold relative to the estimated total weight for the purpose of keeping an up to date list of expected results for an item with variable weights (see e.g. Morris ¶ [0047]) so as not to trigger a false alert despite the shopper doing everything correctly thus avoiding embarrassment on behalf of the shopper and avoiding possible business deterrence of shoppers.
Regarding claim 15, Buchholz discloses all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends.
Buchholz doesn’t explicitly disclose an indicator guides a user to correctly position the portable carrier onto the surface of the floor scale.
In the same field of endeavor, Morris teaches a floor scale that weighs a portable carrier full of products and then compares the total carrier weight to predicted weight (¶¶ [0039]-[0040]). Morris further teaches an indicator guides a user to correctly position the portable carrier onto the surface of the floor scale (¶ [0045]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to include Morris’s position indicator in Buchholz’s system for the purpose of ensuing the carrier is positioned correctly on the scale to avoid weighing errors and thus errors in measured weight that could be a misrepresentation of the predicted weight matching or not matching with the estimated weight. Avoiding errors provides the benefit of extra security at the retail location (Morris, ¶ [0046]).
Regarding claim 18, Buchholz discloses the control circuit (33) that determines whether the estimated total weight of the purchased items associated with the receipt does not match within the threshold with the actual weight of the portable carrier (80) (¶ [0096]) and also discloses an indicator that displays information related to the weight of the portable carrier (80) (¶ [0096]).
Buchholz further discloses that when the two weights do not match within the threshold, an employee should make an item-to-item comparison (¶[0096]).
Buchholz does not explicitly disclose causing, by the control circuit, an indicator to convey an alert indicating that the estimated total weight of the purchased items associated with the receipt does not match within the threshold with the actual weight of the portable carrier, though one having ordinary skill in the art could readily appreciated and infer that conveying an alert if there is no match would be obvious in order for an employee to be even made aware that an item-to-item comparison audit needs to be made.
Nevertheless, in the same field of endeavor, Morris teaches a floor scale that weighs a portable carrier full of products and then compares the total carrier weight to predicted weight (¶¶ [0039]-[0040]). Morris further teaches causing, by the control circuit, an indicator to convey an alert indicating that the estimated total weight of the purchased items associated with the receipt does not match within the threshold with the actual weight of the portable carrier (¶ [0045]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to configure Buchholz’s indicator to convey an alert upon the determination that the measured carrier weight does not match the predicted weight for the purpose of getting the attention of an employee who can then help determine the cause of the discrepancy. This feature provides the benefit of adding order security to the automated shopping system (Morris ¶ [0046]).
Regarding claim 19, Buchholz as modified by Morris discloses all the limitations of claim 18 on which this claim depends.
Morris further teaches the alert is a signal summoning a retail associate to come towards the floor scale (¶ [0045]).
The reasons and motivation for combining are the same as recited in the rejection of claim 18 above.
Regarding claim 20, Buchholz discloses all the limitations of claim 17 on which this claim depends.
Buchholz is silent to adjusting, by the control circuit, the threshold in response to the actual weight being outside the threshold relative to the estimated total weight based on at least one of a minimum or a maximum weight of an item in the items purchased associated with the receipt, wherein the item is associated with a category of products whose weight varies substantially from one item to another item of same product.
In the same field of endeavor, Morris teaches a floor scale that weighs a portable carrier full of products and then compares the total carrier weight to predicted weight (¶¶ [0039]-[0040]). Morris further teaches adjusting, by the control circuit, the threshold in response to the actual weight being outside the threshold relative to the estimated total weight based on at least one of a minimum or a maximum weight of an item in the items purchased associated with the receipt, wherein the item is associated with a category of products whose weight varies substantially from one item to another item of same product (¶¶ [0047]-[0049]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to configure Buchholz’s circuit to adjust the threshold in response to the actual weight being outside the threshold relative to the estimated total weight for the purpose of keeping an up to date list of expected results for an item with variable weights (see e.g. Morris ¶ [0047]) so as not to trigger a false alert despite the shopper doing everything correctly thus avoiding embarrassment on behalf of the shopper and avoiding possible business deterrence of shoppers.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buchholz in view of Bayrd (USPN 5,383,639).
Regarding claim 16, Buchholz discloses all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends.
Buchholz is silent to the floor scale comprises divots that position the portable carrier within the surface of the floor scale.
Byard generally teaches in figures 1 and 6 divots (40) that position a portable carrier (80) within a surface (depressions 40 are sized to accept shopping cart wheels and hold them in place, (see figure 6, col. 1, lines 56-58, col. 4, lines 13-17).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention modify the system of Buchholz by using divots that position a portable carrier within a surface as disclosed by Byard in order to secure the shopping cart in place (Byard col. 4, lines 13-17).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20140175164 discloses an audit practice of comparing the predicted weight of an entire shopping cart full of purchased goods to a measured weight before leaving a shopping facility (¶ [0035]).
JP 2019528537 discloses an audit practice of comparing the predicted weight of an entire shopping cart full of purchased goods to a measured weight before leaving a shopping facility.
US 2017/0083887 discloses comparing the predicted weight of an entire shopping cart full of purchased goods to a measured weight during a point of sale process.
US 2023/0092824 discloses comparing the predicted weight of an entire shopping basket full of purchased goods to a measured weight during a point of sale process.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATALIE HULS whose telephone number is (571)270-5914. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 EST.
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, John Breene can be reached at (571) 272-4107. 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.
/NATALIE HULS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights