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 .
Priority
For the purpose of prior art consideration, the effective filing date of the instant application is based on the application filed in Japan on July 7th, 2023. Priority to this date has been perfected with the English translation of the certified copy of the instant application as filed in the United States on December 12th, 2025.
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 therefore, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1: Whether a Claim is to a Statutory Category
In the instant case, claims 1-9 recite a device/machine; claims 10-17 recite a system/machine and claims 18-20 recite a method/process that are performing a series of functions. Therefore, these claims fall within the four statutory categories of invention of a machine. Step 1 is satisfied.
Step2A – Prong 1: Does the Claim Recite a Judicial Exception
Exemplary claim 1 (and similarly claims 10 and 18) recites the following abstract concepts that are found to include an enumerated “abstract idea”:
A point-of-sale device, comprising:
an interface unit for acquiring a recognition result from an external device, the recognition result being a recognition of a product based on a captured image of the product;
a user input unit for receiving user operations; and
a processor configured to:
execute a registering process for registering the product in a sales transaction based on the acquired recognition result;
cause a display screen to display a list of each product registered in the sales transaction;
receive a change operation via the user input unit to change a registered product on the list;
add information corresponding to the change operation to the list displayed on the display screen;
receive a registration end instruction via user input operation performed on the user input unit, the registration end instruction requesting an end of the registering process and a start of a payment process; and
after receiving the registration end instruction, send a change notification to a clerk terminal if the change operation was received before the registration end instruction was performed.
[Emphasis added to show the bolded abstract idea being executed by unbolded additional elements that do not meaningfully limit the abstract idea]
This apparatus device is grouped within the "certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas in prong one of step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test because the claims involve a series of steps for sales activities by following instructions for executing a registering process for registering the product in a sales transaction, which is a process that is encompassed by the abstract idea of commercial or legal interactions and managing personal behavior. See e.g., MPEP 2106.04(a)(2) and Subject Matter Eligibility Example 47. Accordingly, claim 1 (and similarly claims 10 and 18) are found to recite abstract idea(s).
Step2A – Prong 2: Does the Claim Recite Additional Elements that Integrate the Judicial Exception into a Practical Application
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because, when analyzed under prong two of step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test, the additional elements of the claims such as point-of-sale device, interface unit, external device, user input unit, processor, display screen and clerk terminal merely use a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and/or generally link the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment. Specifically, the point-of-sale device, interface unit, external device, user input unit, processor, display screen and clerk terminal perform the steps or functions of sales activities by following instructions for executing a registering process for registering the product in a sales transaction. The use of a processor/computer as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it requires no more than a computer (or technical elements disclosed at a high level of generality such as point-of-sale device, interface unit, external device, user input unit, processor, display screen and clerk terminal) performing functions of acquiring, receiving, registering, displaying, changing, adding and sending that correspond to acts required to carry out the abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f) and (h)). Accordingly, the additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and the claims are directed to an abstract idea.
Step2B: Does the Claim Amount to Significantly More
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The additional element analysis of Step 2A Prong 2 is equally applied to Step 2B. “Another consideration when determining whether a claim recites significantly more than a judicial exception is whether the additional element(s) are well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry. This consideration is only evaluated in Step 2B of the eligibility analysis.” MPEP 2106.05(d). The courts have recognized the following computer functions as well‐understood, routine, and conventional (“WURC”) functions when they are claimed in a merely generic manner (e.g., at a high level of generality) or as insignificant extra-solution activity. Exemplary claim 1 recites the following limitations that the courts have found to be WURC:
Claim 1 includes several limitations relating to receiving or transmitting data over a network (an interface unit for acquiring a recognition result from an external device…; a user input unit for receiving user operations…; receive a change operation via the user input unit…; receive a registration end instruction via user input operation performed on the user input unit…; send a change notification to a clerk terminal…; as claimed). See MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) where courts found to be WURC - i. Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1745 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (using a telephone for image transmission); OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network); but see DDR Holdings, LLC v. Hotels.com, L.P., 773 F.3d 1245, 1258, 113 USPQ2d 1097, 1106 (Fed. Cir. 2014) ("Unlike the claims in Ultramercial, the claims at issue here specify how interactions with the Internet are manipulated to yield a desired result‐‐a result that overrides the routine and conventional sequence of events ordinarily triggered by the click of a hyperlink." (emphasis added));
Claim 1 includes several limitations relating to storing and retrieving information in memory (add information corresponding to the change operation to the list displayed on the display screen …; as claimed). See MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) where courts found to be WURC - ii. Performing repetitive calculations, Flook, 437 U.S. at 594, 198 USPQ2d at 199 (recomputing or readjusting alarm limit values); Bancorp Services v. Sun Life, 687 F.3d 1266, 1278, 103 USPQ2d 1425, 1433 (Fed. Cir. 2012) ("The computer required by some of Bancorp’s claims is employed only for its most basic function, the performance of repetitive calculations, and as such does not impose meaningful limits on the scope of those claims.")
Claim 1 includes several limitations relating to performing repetitive calculations (execute a registering process for registering the product in a sales transaction based on the acquired recognition result; cause a display screen to display a list of each product registered in the sales transaction; as claimed). See MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) where courts found to be WURC - ii. Performing repetitive calculations, Flook, 437 U.S. at 594, 198 USPQ2d at 199 (recomputing or readjusting alarm limit values); Bancorp Services v. Sun Life, 687 F.3d 1266, 1278, 103 USPQ2d 1425, 1433 (Fed. Cir. 2012) ("The computer required by some of Bancorp’s claims is employed only for its most basic function, the performance of repetitive calculations, and as such does not impose meaningful limits on the scope of those claims.");
Accordingly, when viewed alone and in ordered combination, these additional elements are not found to recite significantly more than the underlying abstract idea.
Independent claim 10 describes an system to perform functions of object recognition, acquiring, receiving, registering, displaying, changing, adding and outputting relating to sales activities by following instructions for executing a registering process for registering the product in a sales transaction without additional elements beyond technical elements disclosed at a high level of generality such as a point-of-sale device, imaging device, edge device, interface unit, user input unit, processor and display screen that provide significantly more than the abstract idea of commercial or legal interactions and managing personal behavior through sales activities by following instructions for executing a registering process for registering the product in a sales transaction as noted above regarding claim 1. Therefore, this independent claim is also not patent eligible.
Independent claim 18 describes a method to perform functions of acquiring, receiving, registering, displaying, changing, adding and sending relating to sales activities by following instructions for executing a registering process for registering the product in a sales transaction without additional elements beyond technical elements disclosed at a high level of generality such as an external device, user input unit, display screen and clerk terminal that provide significantly more than the abstract idea of commercial or legal interactions and managing personal behavior through sales activities by following instructions for executing a registering process for registering the product in a sales transaction as noted above regarding claim 1. Therefore, this independent claim is also not patent eligible.
Dependent claims 2-7, 11-17 and 19-20 further describes the abstract idea of commercial or legal interactions. Dependent claims 2-7, 11-17 and 19-20 add receiving, updating, changing, payment processing, change confirmation and image analysis steps that are executed by a processor, clerk terminal, user input unit, point-of-sale device and as disclosed in independent claims 1, 10 and 18, however these additional steps remain disclosed at a high level of generality and do not amount to more than mere computer implementation of the abstract idea, which does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or provide significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, dependent claims 2-7, 11-17 and 19-20 are also not patent eligible. Further, the dependency of these claims on ineligible independent claims 1, 10 and 18 also renders dependent claims 2-7, 11-17 and 19-20 as not patent eligible.
Dependent claims 8 and 9 further describes the abstract idea of commercial and/ or legal interactions and managing personal behavior. Dependent claims 8 and 9 add technical elements of an interface unit being connected to the imaging device and the interface unit being connected to an edge device via a network, respectively. However, these additional technical elements do not relieve the fact that the functions performed by the respective independent base claim 1 of these dependent claims remain disclosed at a high level of generality and do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or provide significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, dependent claims 8 and 9 are also not patent eligible. Further, the dependency of these claims on ineligible independent claim 1 also renders dependent claims 8 and 9 as not patent eligible.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Itani et al. (US 2015/0310414 A1) in view of Sato et al. (US 2026/0170835 A1) and Brakob et al. (US 2023/0056327 A1).
Regarding Claim 1 and 18, Itani teaches:
A point-of-sale device/ A point-of-sale terminal processing method for handling retail sales transactions (See Itani ¶ [0027] – POS register device comprising a checker device (10) and a POS terminal (20)), comprising:
an interface unit for acquiring a recognition result from an … device, the recognition result being a recognition of a product based on a captured image of the product (See Itani ¶ [0030-0033] – scanning device capturing images of product identifiers … the checker device identifies [recognition result] the product on the basis of the product code extracted from the product identification label using the scanning device, a product code acquired by operation of the checkout screen, or a product code directly inputted through the keyboard and registers this product as the item to be checked out);
a user input unit for receiving user operations (See Itani ¶ [0030-0033] – a product code acquired by operation of the checkout screen, or a product code directly inputted through the keyboard and registers this product as the item to be checked out); and
a processor (See Itani ¶ [0038] – CPU of the POS device) configured to:
execute a registering process for registering the product in a sales transaction based on the acquired recognition result (See Itani ¶ [0034] – the checker device 10 registers an item to be checked out as described above in ¶ [0030-0033] … from the product identification label using a handheld scanner, or a product code (or segment code) directly inputted through, for example, a keyboard, and additionally registers this product as the item to be checked out);
cause a display screen to display a list of each product registered in the sales transaction (See Itani ¶ [0036] – The display unit displays a sales registration screen and a payment screen);
receive a change operation via the user input unit to change a registered product on the list (See Itani ¶ [0052] – upon detecting that a designation changing button is pressed on the registration screen through the touch screen, the display processing unit causes the display unit to display a designation changing screen for changing a transaction statement record corresponding to the line (data) selected on the registration screen);
add information corresponding to the change operation to the list displayed on the display screen (See Itani ¶ [0054-0055] – multiple buttons are displayed on a screen to effect changes to a transaction as shown in Fig. 6);
…; and
…, send a change notification to a clerk terminal … (See Itani ¶ [0050-0052] – after selection of the final line item of a transaction, a designation changing button is displayed on a touch screen [change notification to a clerk terminal by example], [0094] - At the time of changing transaction statements that have been registered, the delete flags of plural transaction statement records stored in the transaction-information storage unit are set to be in the deleted state. Then, a new transaction statement record having the request change information reflected therein is stored in the transaction-information storage unit).
While Itani teaches a point of sale register device that recognizes products through captured images of product data to perform a sales registration process (Itani ¶ [0027] and [0030-0033]), Itani does not explicitly teach that said registration process includes receiving a registration end instruction via a user input operation performed on the user input unit, the registration end instruction requesting an end of the registering process and a start of a payment process. This is taught by Sato (See Sato ¶ [0285] – When scanning of all the products is completed, the settlement button is pressed. Then, a screen for selecting a payment method appears, and the customer selects a payment method. Payment is executed by the payment method being selected).
Further, while Itani teaches a point of sale register device that recognizes products through captured images of product data to perform a sales registration process involving send a change notification to a clerk terminal (Itani ¶ [0027], [0030-0033], [0050-0052] and [0094]), Itani does not explicitly teach that after receiving the registration end instruction, sending said change notification if the change operation was received before the registration end instruction. This is taught by Sato (See Sato ¶ [0292] – While a customer stands in front of the self-checkout terminal, executes the product registration processing with the self-checkout terminal, executes the settlement processing, performs payment, and receives change and a receipt, in other words, in a case of before completion of accounting processing, when the detection unit detects that the customer picks up the product from the product display region, the processing unit causes the touch panel of the self-checkout terminal to display the information for urging the customer to execute the product registration for the product).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the captured image checkout process of Itani the use of a registration end instruction and order change notification as taught by Sato to implement a measure to prevent accounting omission (Sato ¶ [0290]), thereby increasing the accuracy and efficiency of the captured image checkout process of Itani.
While Itani teaches a point of sale register device that recognizes products through captured images of product data (Itani ¶ [0027] and [0030-0033]), Itani does not explicitly teach that said recognition is from an external device. This is taught by Brakob (See Brakob ¶ [0111-0112] – using external devices, such as edge computing devices to analyze image data to recognize products in images of product scanning activity during a checkout process).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the captured image checkout process of Itani the use of external devices for image analysis as taught by Brakob to improve accuracy in scanning motion identification determinations (Brakob ¶ [0024]), thereby increasing the accuracy of the captured image checkout process of Itani.
Regarding Claim 2, 11 and 19, modified Itani teaches:
The point-of-sale device/ system/ terminal processing method according to claim 1, 10 and 18, wherein the processor is further configured to:
receive a change confirmation operation for confirming the change operation (See Itani ¶ [0055] – Upon detecting user operation performed to an enter button on the designation changing screen, the display processing unit acquires the set transaction information after change has been made, as request change information, and transmits, to the information acquiring unit [change confirmation operation by example]); and
update products registered in the sales transaction to reflect the change operation confirmed by the received change confirmation operation (See Itani ¶ [0094-0095] – the data corresponding to the plural transaction statement records before change are made are displayed on the registration screen in a form such that these data are in the deleted state, and one transaction statement record after change has been made is additionally displayed… Thus, the register operator can recognize the operations performed by him/herself by checking data displayed on the registration screen).
Regarding Claim 3 and 12, modified Itani teaches:
The point-of-sale device/ system according to claim 2 and 11, wherein change confirmation operation is received from the clerk terminal (See Itani ¶ [0071] – cashier device and checker device displaying the same information and [0094-0095] - the register operator can recognize the operations performed by him/herself by checking data displayed on the registration screen).
Regarding Claim 4 and 13, modified Itani teaches:
The point-of-sale device/ system according to claim 3 and 12, wherein the change notification includes information indicating registered products on the list before and after the change operation (See Itani ¶ [0094-0095] – the data corresponding to the plural transaction statement records before change are made are displayed on the registration screen in a form such that these data are in the deleted state, and one transaction statement record after change has been made is additionally displayed).
Regarding Claim 5, 14 and 20, modified Itani teaches:
The point-of-sale device/ system/ terminal processing method according to claim 2, 11 and 18, wherein the change confirmation operation is received from the user input unit (See Itani ¶ [0074] - Upon detecting that the enter button on the designation changing screen… is pressed through user operation and [0094-0095] – the data corresponding to the plural transaction statement records before change are made are displayed on the registration screen in a form such that these data are in the deleted state, and one transaction statement record after change has been made is additionally displayed… Thus, the register operator can recognize the operations performed by him/herself by checking data displayed on the registration screen).
Regarding Claim 6 and 15, modified Itani teaches:
The point-of-sale device/ system according to claim 2 and 11, wherein the processor is further configured to:
perform a payment processing for the sales transaction after the change confirmation operation is performed (See Itani ¶ [0036] - The display unit 22 a displays, for example, a sales registration screen and a payment screen. The display 25 for purchaser displays, for example, the total purchase price, and the amount of change and [0094-0095] – the data corresponding to the plural transaction statement records before change are made are displayed on the registration screen in a form such that these data are in the deleted state, and one transaction statement record after change has been made is additionally displayed… Thus, the register operator can recognize the operations performed by him/herself by checking data displayed on the registration screen).
Regarding Claim 7 and 16, modified Itani teaches:
The point-of-sale device/ system according to claim 1 and 10, wherein the information corresponding to the change operation is a strikethrough of a deleted registered product (See Itani ¶ [0051] - the display processing unit draws a strike-through line through a line (data) corresponding to the transaction statement record indicating the deleted state).
Regarding Claim 8, modified Itani teaches:
The point-of-sale device according to claim 1, wherein the interface unit is connected to an imaging device (See Itani ¶ [0030] – scanning device (13) captures images of product codes, [0038 & 0040] – input-output interface (6) is connected to said scanning device as shown in Fig. 2 – in the checker device element (6) is connected to element (13)).
Regarding Claim 9, modified Itani teaches:
The point-of-sale device according to claim 1, wherein the interface unit is connected, via a network (See Itani ¶ [0038 & 0040] – input-output interface is part of the POS register device and [0102-0104] – POS register device may be part of a POS system that is connected through a communication network),
While Itani teaches a point of sale register device that recognizes products through captured images of product data (Itani ¶ [0027] and [0030-0033]), Itani does not explicitly teach that said recognition is from a connection to an edge device for image analysis. This is taught by Brakob (See Brakob ¶ [0111-0112] – using external devices, such as edge computing devices to analyze image data to recognize products in images of product scanning activity during a checkout process). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the captured image checkout process of Itani the use of external devices for image analysis as taught by Brakob to improve accuracy in scanning motion identification determinations (Brakob ¶ [0024]), thereby increasing the accuracy of the captured image checkout process of Itani.
Regarding Claim 10, Itani teaches:
A point-of-sale system (See Itani ¶ [0102-0104] – POS register device may be part of a POS system that is connected through a communication network), comprising:
an imaging device (See Itani ¶ [0030-0033] – scanning device capturing images of product identifiers);
a point-of-sale device connected to the imaging device (See Itani ¶ [0030] – scanning device (13) captures images of product codes, [0038 & 0040] – input-output interface (6) is connected to said scanning device as shown in Fig. 2 – in the checker device element (6) is connected to element (13));
…, wherein
the point-of-sale device includes:
an interface unit for acquiring a recognition result from … the imaging device, the recognition result being a recognition of a product based on a captured image of the product (See Itani ¶ [0030-0033] – scanning device capturing images of product identifiers … the checker device identifies [recognition result] the product on the basis of the product code extracted from the product identification label using the scanning device, a product code acquired by operation of the checkout screen, or a product code directly inputted through the keyboard and registers this product as the item to be checked out);
a user input unit for receiving user operations (See Itani ¶ [0030-0033] – a product code acquired by operation of the checkout screen, or a product code directly inputted through the keyboard and registers this product as the item to be checked out); and
a processor configured to:
execute a registering process for registering the product in a sales transaction based on the acquired recognition result (See Itani ¶ [0034] – the checker device 10 registers an item to be checked out as described above in ¶ [0030-0033] … from the product identification label using a handheld scanner, or a product code (or segment code) directly inputted through, for example, a keyboard, and additionally registers this product as the item to be checked out);
cause a display screen to display a list of each product registered in the sales transaction (See Itani ¶ [0036] – The display unit displays a sales registration screen and a payment screen);
receive a change operation via the user input unit to change a registered product on the list (See Itani ¶ [0052] – upon detecting that a designation changing button is pressed on the registration screen through the touch screen, the display processing unit causes the display unit to display a designation changing screen for changing a transaction statement record corresponding to the line (data) selected on the registration screen);
add information corresponding to the change operation to the list displayed on the display screen (See Itani ¶ [0054-0055] – multiple buttons are displayed on a screen to effect changes to a transaction as shown in Fig. 6);
…; and
...
While Itani teaches a point of sale register device that recognizes products through captured images of product data to perform a sales registration process (Itani ¶ [0027] and [0030-0033]), Itani does not explicitly teach that said registration process includes receiving a registration end instruction via a user input operation performed on the user input unit, the registration end instruction requesting an end of the registering process and a start of a payment process. This is taught by Sato (See Sato ¶ [0285] – When scanning of all the products is completed, the settlement button is pressed. Then, a screen for selecting a payment method appears, and the customer selects a payment method. Payment is executed by the payment method being selected).
Further, while Itani teaches a point of sale register device that recognizes products through captured images of product data to perform a sales registration process involving send a change notification to a clerk terminal (Itani ¶ [0027], [0030-0033], [0050-0052] and [0094]), Itani does not explicitly teach after receiving the registration end instruction, output a change notification if the change operation was received before the registration end instruction. This is taught by Sato (See Sato ¶ [0292] – While a customer stands in front of the self-checkout terminal, executes the product registration processing with the self-checkout terminal, executes the settlement processing, performs payment, and receives change and a receipt, in other words, in a case of before completion of accounting processing, when the detection unit detects that the customer picks up the product from the product display region, the processing unit causes the touch panel of the self-checkout terminal to display the information for urging the customer to execute the product registration for the product).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the captured image checkout process of Itani the use of a registration end instruction and order change notification as taught by Sato to implement a measure to prevent accounting omission (Sato ¶ [0290]), thereby increasing the accuracy and efficiency of the captured image checkout process of Itani.
While Itani teaches a point of sale register device that recognizes products through captured images of product data (Itani ¶ [0027] and [0030-0033]), Itani does not explicitly teach that said recognition is from an external device. This is taught by Brakob (See Brakob ¶ [0111-0112] – using external devices, such as edge computing devices to analyze image data to recognize products in images of product scanning activity during a checkout process).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the captured image checkout process of Itani the use of external devices for image analysis as taught by Brakob to improve accuracy in scanning motion identification determinations (Brakob ¶ [0024]), thereby increasing the accuracy of the captured image checkout process of Itani.
Regarding Claim 17, modified Itani teaches:
The point-of-sale system according to claim 10, wherein the recognition result includes a plurality of candidate products (See Itani ¶ [0049] – the product name is acquired from a product information table [plurality of candidate products by example] on the basis of the product code).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/22/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 101:
The claims of the instant application have not been amended and the previous rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 101 in maintained.
Contrary to the applicant’s assertion that amended independent claims 1, 10 and 18 do not cover a commercial interaction, said claims remain limited to execution of technical elements disclosed at a high level of generality and in their ordinary capacity amounting to not more than computer implementation of the abstract idea, which does not show integration into a practical application nor does it show significantly more than the abstract ideas discussed above in the current rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Further, due to this high level of generality, said claims do not reflect a technological improvement to a technical problem, but rather only reflect improvement of the abstract idea. Any improvement of a claimed invention must be clearly reflected by said claims.
The claims of Desjardins were found to clearly reflect an improvement to the performance of a machine learning model, which is not relevant to the independent claims of the instant application.
Dependent claims 2-9, 11-17 and 19-20 also remain rejected as described above in the current rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
The specification of an instant application is not read into the claims during examination.
Rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103:
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 10-13, filed 06/22/2026, with respect to the rejection of claims 1, 10 and 18 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of Itani, Sato and Brakob as detailed above in the current rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Dependent claims 2-9, 11-17 and 19-20 also remain rejected as described above in the current rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW S WERONSKI whose telephone number is (571)272-5802. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am - 5 pm 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, Fahd A. Obeid can be reached at 5712703324. 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.
/MATTHEW S WERONSKI/Examiner, Art Unit 3627
/MICHAEL JARED WALKER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627
Prosecution Insights