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 .
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 (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 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) 1, 2, 4 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pechinko et al (US 2020/0175800 A1) in view of Jones et al (US 9,141,876 B1).
Regarding Claim 1, Pechinko teaches
a bill processor, i.e., automated machine (1), as mentioned at paragraph 24, comprising:
an interface, i.e., communications interface (5a), as mentioned at paragraph 31 and as illustrated in figure 2, for receiving electronic currency information
transmitted from a mobile terminal (10), as mentioned at paragraphs 11, 12, 23-27, for example;
a bill validator (4), as mentioned at paragraph 34, for discriminating a bill inserted from an insertion opening, as mentioned at paragraphs 9, 32 and 59 and as illustrated in figures 2, 8 and 9, noting inlet (16) of bezel (14) of bill acceptor (4) in automated machine (1), the bill validator (4) comprising a validation transceiver, i.e., control device (8), as illustrated in figure 2 and as mentioned at paragraph 33, for receiving the electronic currency information transmitted from the interface, i.e., (5a) and interface (5b), as mentioned at paragraphs 33 and 53, for example; and
a bill stacker (9), as illustrated in figure 2 and as mentioned at paragraphs 35, 36 and 41-46, for accumulating bills considered genuine by and forwarded from the bill validator (4);
wherein the bill stacker (9) comprises a stacker transceiver, i.e., implied/suggested as being part of memory/storage device (12), as illustrated in figures 2, 3 and 5-8, for receiving electronic currency information transmitted from the validation transceiver (8) of the bill validator (4) and a stacker memory (12) for storing the electronic currency information sent from the stacker transceiver, as mentioned at paragraphs 41-46, which state as follows.
[0041] After or before bills are extracted from stacker 9, it is put on a readout device 13 as shown in FIG. 3, but storage device 12 attached to stacker 9 is retained in the non-contact condition away from readout device 43 that may be operated to retrieve the following four kinds of information stored in storage device 12:
[0042] (i) Total amount and total number of bills stowed in stacker 9;
[0043] (ii) All denomination signals of bills;
[0044] (iii) All account numbers that identify account holders involved; and
[0045] (iv) The specific code signals identifying gaming machine 3 from which stacker 9 has been removed.
[0046] The information readout device 43 has retrieved from storage device 12 is compared with the information of bills removed from stacker 9 and with the information from communications device 5 to inspect whether or not they match.
Emphasis provided.
Note that paragraph 46 is considered to at least suggest that the electronic currency information and bill information is sent to the stacker transceiver attached to memory (12).
Regarding Claim 1, Pechinko does not expressly teach a transceiver and that the electronic currency information and bill information is sent to the transceiver attached to the stacker memory of the stacker/cassette.
Regarding Claim 1, Regarding Claim 1, Pechinko does not expressly teach, but Jones teaches a transceiver, i.e., wireless communication device (TR), as illustrated in figures 4a and 4b and as mentioned at col. 29, lines 16-62, attached to cassettes (CS) and mini-safes (SF) as illustrated in figures 4a-4c and noting the two way communication characteristic of a transceiver in col. 30, line 51-col. 31, line 3, for example. Note that Jones mentions electronic deposit slips (EDS) information held in the memory of mini-safes or cassettes as mentioned at col. 30, lines 32-50. Note also that a deposit slip can be associated with a transaction concerning a batch of documents, such as that associated with one or more mini-safes or cassettes as mentioned at col. 8, lines 32-44, col. 22, line 50-col. 23, line 27, and col. 27, line 36-col. 28, line 3, mentioning wireless transceiver (TR) and exchanging information “such as deposit transaction data such as electronic deposit slip data”. Note also further mention of electronic deposit slips (EDS) being generated by an electronic device as mentioned at col. 62, lines 1-15, for example. Col. 110, line 49-col. 111, line 3 mentions the common accounting technique of reconciliation of the deposit transactions. See also Col. 116, lines 35-col. 117, line 34, and particularly col. 117, lines 7-17. See also col. col. 131, lines 18-37, col. 132, lines 48-56, col. 135, lines 47-60, which state as follows.
(602) According to some embodiments such as some of those described above, a deposit transaction is initiated at site remote from a bank branch or vault such as at a retailer location using a document processing device 11 that is a document imaging device 44. According to some such embodiments, currency bills and checks in the deposit transaction are processed on the remote document imaging device 44 (e.g., at a retail location, e.g., R1-Rn, 1101). Such embodiments, take advantage of the benefits described above associated with imaging deposit documents and loading the related data/images into the memory of a smart container(s). When a smart container processed by a document imaging device 44 at a remote location such as at a retailer location is subsequently reconciled using a document imaging device in the cash vault (or alternately at the commercial teller window of a branch or at a commercial ATM (e.g., ATM#1) or merchant teller machine (e.g., MT-14)), the reconciliation device may have a large amount of data available to more accurately confirm the deposit and/or to correctly reconcile any differences.
(606) According to some embodiments, the deposit slip may be run through the device 44 first and the device will image the deposit slip, extract declared bill and/or check amounts and balance the deposit transaction against the declared amounts extracted from the deposit slip. According to some embodiments, physical deposit slip is not processed by the device 44 but rather the device 44 generates an electronic deposit slip and/or a physical deposit slip after processing all currency bills and checks in a deposit transaction.
(620) According to some embodiments, the data provided in the smart container memory is used to help reconcile any differences/discrepancies between what is expected to be in a container and the actual physical documents found in the cassette. Any differences or discrepancies can then be reconciled to the customer's account and/or images of any documents subject to the discrepancy can be provided to the associated customer/depositor/retailer (e.g., the imaging of any no-show or unexpected documents could be provided to a customer) such as by providing the depositor a print out of the subject document images (e.g., in a bank statement) and/or sending the images electronically to a customer network, email address, a bank website/database available to the customer, etc.
Emphasis provided.
Regarding Claim 1, before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided a transceiver and that the electronic currency information and bill information is sent to the transceiver attached to the stacker memory of the stacker/cassette., as taught by Jones, in Pechinko’s bill processor and stacker device for the purpose of enabling accurate reconciliation of transactions including the transfer of the inventory of transactions performed at a particular automatic machine during a particular time period, as is common in commerce using accounting procedures.
Note that since Pechinko already teaches “[t]he information readout device 43 has retrieved from storage device 12 is compared with the information of bills removed from stacker 9 and with the information from communications device 5 to inspect whether or not they match” at paragraph 46 and Jones teaches using the information stored in the memory/processor (410), as mentioned at col. 29, lines 31-36 and 52-62 for more accurately reconciling transactions, and both Pechinko’s and Jones’ devices have predictable structure and function and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the efficacy and synergy of the combination based upon the references' teachings as well as common sense, logic and reason.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have included any data/information in the stacker memory (12) of Pechinko so that the electronic currency information and bill information is sent to the stacker transceiver attached to stacker memory (12) for the purpose of providing enough data for a more accurate reconciliation of the transactions performed in the automated machine (1) during a particular time period.
Regarding Claim 2, see the rejection of Claim 1, above.
Regarding Claim 4, Pechinko teaches wherein the interface comprises a bezel
Antenna, i.e, communications interface (5a) formed with a loop coiled radio antenna, as mentioned at paragraph 60, for example, for telecommunication of electronic currency information with the mobile terminal (10); and
the electronic currency information is transmitted through the bezel antenna of the interface (5a) and the validation transceiver (8) of the bill validator (4) to store the electronic currency information in the stacker memory (12) of the bill stacker (4), as mentioned at paragraph 49, for example.
Regarding Claim 8, see the rejection of Claim 4, above.
Claim(s) 3, 5-7 and 9-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pechinko et al (US 2020/0175800 A1) in view of Jones et al (US 9,141,876 B1) and further in view of Schreckenberg (US 10,504,084 B2).
Regarding Claims 3, 5-7 and 9-15, Pechinko teaches the system as described above.
Regarding Claim 3, Pechinko teaches a bill processor (1) comprising:
a bezel (24) that has an interface, i.e., communications interface (5a) and signal processor (5b), as mentioned at paragraphs 47 and 60, for receiving remote signals from a mobile terminal (10), the remote signals being inclusive of a
request information, noting that the signals mentioned at paragraphs 47 and 48 including denomination signals and account number signals are considered to require requests for beginning the process of transferring such signals;
a bill validator (4) for discriminating a bill inserted
through an insertion opening (16) of the bezel (24) to generate
discrimination information of the bill, i.e., via bill sensor (22); and
a bill stacker (9) for accumulating bills considered genuine
by and supplied from the bill validator (4);
wherein the bill validator (4) comprises a validation
transceiver (8) for transmitting the discrimination information of
the bill, as mentioned at paragraph 32, for example;
the bill stacker (9) comprises a stacker transceiver, as taught by Jones, for
receiving the discrimination information of the bill sent from
the validation transceiver (8) of the bill validator (4) and a stacker
memory (12) for storing the discrimination information sent from the
stacker transceiver (8);
the validation transceiver, as taught by Jones, of the bill validator (4) receives
the request information sent from the interface (5a, 5b) and diverts the
request information to the stacker transceiver, as taught by Jones, of the bill
stacker (4), as mentioned at paragraphs 42-46,
the stacker transceiver, as taught by Jones, of the bill stacker (4) receives the
request information and retrieves in the stacker memory (12)
electronic currency information suitable to the request
information to transmit the retrieved electronic currency
information to the mobile terminal (10) through the interface (5, 5a, 5b), noting the two way transmission of data indicated in figures 2 and 5-8 between interface (5, 5a, 5b) and mobile terminal (10), as mentioned at paragraphs 47, 48, 52, 55, 56 (mentioning the mobile device has a transceiver (32, 33)).
Regarding Claim 3, Pechinko does not expressly teach
the stacker transceiver receives the request information and retrieves in the stacker memory electronic currency information suitable to the request
information to transmit the retrieved electronic currency information to the mobile terminal through the interface.
Regarding Claim 3, Pechinko does not expressly teach, but Schreckenberg teaches
the stacker transceiver, i.e., NFC transceiver (13, 131, 131-A, 131-B), of stacker (1), as illustrated in figures 1 and 2 and as mentioned at col. 13, lines 18-32 and 54-62, for example, receives the request information and retrieves in the stacker memory (121, 121A, 121B), as mentioned at col. 12, lines 19-42, for example,
electronic currency information, i.e., such as banknote serial numbers and status information as mentioned at Col. 12, lines 19-42 and 43-57, suitable to the request
information to transmit the retrieved electronic currency information to the mobile terminal (3) through the interface , as mentioned at col. 17, lines 27-44 and as illustrated in figure 4.
Regarding Claim 3, before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided the stacker transceiver receives the request information and retrieves in the stacker memory electronic currency information suitable to the request information to transmit the retrieved electronic currency information to the mobile terminal through the interface, as taught by Schreckenberg, in Pechinko’s bill processor and stacker device for the purpose of enabling retrieval of pertinent status data on the operation of the stacker as well as the inventory of its contents and transaction data stored in the stacker memory, as is common in commerce using accounting procedures and for performing maintenance checks.
Regarding Claim 5, Pechinko does not expressly teach
wherein the stacker transceiver of the bill stacker is provided with a stacker antenna for telecommunication with a validation antenna of the validation transceiver,
the bill validator comprises a shift circuit for switching on or off the communications between the validation antenna of the validation transceiver and the bezel antenna of the interface and between the validation antenna of the validation transceiver and the stacker antenna of the stacker transceiver; and
for a telecommunication between the mobile terminal and interface, the shift circuit keeps off communication between the validation antenna of the validation transceiver and the stacker antenna of the stacker transceiver and also keeps on communication between the validation antenna of the validation transceiver and the bezel antenna of the interface to allow the telecommunication between the mobile terminal and interface.
Regarding Claim 5, Pechinko does not expressly teach, but Schreckenberg teaches
wherein the stacker transceiver (13, 131, 131-A, 131-B) of the bill stacker (1) is provided with a stacker antenna (231-A through 231-D) for telecommunication with a validation antenna of the validation transceiver, i.e., communications interface (23-A, 23-B), as mentioned at col. 16, lines 29-42 and as illustrated at figure 2, for example, the bill validator, i.e., controller (21), comprises a shift circuit, i.e., multiplexer (232), as illustrated in figure 3 and as mentioned at col. 16, line 59-col. 17, line 26, for switching on or off the communications between the validation antenna of the validation transceiver (23-A, 23-B) and the bezel antenna of the interface, as taught by Pechinko, and between the validation antenna of the validation transceiver (23-A, 23-B) and the stacker antenna of the stacker transceiver (13, 131, 131-A, 131-B); and
for a telecommunication between the mobile terminal (3) and interface, as taught by Pechinko, the shift circuit (232) keeps off communication between the validation antenna of the validation transceiver (23-A, 23-B) and the stacker antenna (231-A through 231-D) of the stacker transceiver (13, 131, 131-A, 131-B) and also keeps on communication between the validation antenna of the validation transceiver (23-A, 23-B) and the bezel antenna of the interface, as taught by Pechinko, to allow the telecommunication between the mobile terminal (3) and interface, as taught by Pechinko, noting that the multiplexer manages the communications between the various communication components throughout the system, represented by the various antennas throughout Schreckenberg’s system, noting again, col. 16, line 59-col. 17, line 26.
Regarding Claim 5, before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided wherein the stacker transceiver of the bill stacker is provided with a stacker antenna for telecommunication with a validation antenna of the validation transceiver,
the bill validator comprises a shift circuit for switching on or off the communications between the validation antenna of the validation transceiver and the bezel antenna of the interface and between the validation antenna of the validation transceiver and the stacker antenna of the stacker transceiver; and
for a telecommunication between the mobile terminal and interface, the shift circuit keeps off communication between the validation antenna of the validation transceiver and the stacker antenna of the stacker transceiver and also keeps on communication between the validation antenna of the validation transceiver and the bezel antenna of the interface to allow the telecommunication between the mobile terminal and interface, as taught by Schreckenberg, in Pechinko’s bill processor and stacker device for the purpose of managing the communications between elements in the system so that data is directed between the desired elements as well as for reducing the number of NFC antenna’s required throughout the system.
Regarding Claim 6, see the rejection of Claim 5, above.
Regarding Claim 7, see the rejection of Claim 5, above.
Regarding Claim 9, see the rejection of Claim 5, above.
Regarding Claim 10, see the rejection of Claim 5, above.
Regarding Claim 11, see the rejection of Claim 5, above.
Regarding Claim 12, see the rejection of Claim 4, above.
Regarding Claim 13, see the rejection of Claim 5, above.
Regarding Claim 14, see the rejection of Claim 5, above.
Regarding Claim 15, see the rejection of Claim 5, above.
Conclusion
Applicant is encouraged to contact the Examiner should there be any questions about this rejection or in an endeavor to explore potential amendments or potential allowable subject matter.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Regarding Claim 1, Pechinko ‘222 is cited as disclosing
a bill processor, i.e., game machine (222), as illustrated in figure 2 and as mentioned at paragraph 63, comprising:
an interface, i.e., peripheral adapter (225), as mentioned at paragraph 68 and as illustrated in figure 2, for receiving electronic currency information,
a bill validator (226), as mentioned at paragraph 68, for discriminating a bill inserted from an insertion opening, the bill validator (226) noting paragraphs 63-68 and 90-95, for example.
It is also noted that Pechinko ‘222 appears to have an earliest date of 5/22/20 and a publication date of 11/25/21, which is before that of the instant application which is 1/14/22. Note also that Pechinko ‘222 has an assignee of JCM American Corporation with inventors Pechinko, Blevens and Kubajak versus the instant application which has an assignee of Japan Cash Machine with inventors Okawa and Seki, which are all different than that of Pechinko ‘222.
Johnson ‘022 is cited as teaching a bezel assembly (100) that includes an interface (140) that accepts wireless communication with a mobile device for accepting electronic cash, as well as for accepting banknotes through inlet (110), as illustrated in figure 1-33, for example.
Nireki ‘233 is cited as teaching a banknote cassette (100) with an RFID device (104) with memory (104b) and transceiver/antenna (104c) that interfaces with transceiver (142) on the upper part of the validator housing (2), as illustrated in figures 1-33, for example.
Russell ‘326 is cited as teaching a cryptocurrency kiosk/ATM (100) that interfaces with a mobile device (220), as illustrated in figure 2 and 5 and that also accepts banknotes through bill validator inlet (110) and dispenses banknotes via dispenser (120) as illustrated in figure 5, for example.
Kubajak ‘584 is cited as teaching a currency tracking and accounting system (100), as illustrated in figure 1, for example.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEFFREY ALAN SHAPIRO whose telephone number is (571)272-6943. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday generally between 8:30AM and 6:30PM.
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, Anita Y Coupe can be reached at 571-270-3614. 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.
/JEFFREY A SHAPIRO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619
September 3, 2026
Prosecution Insights