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 Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the sensor" in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 and 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Howard (US 6614392) in view of Jacober et al. (US 7212127).
Re claim 1: Howard teaches an intelligent label (2) serving as a wireless communication device comprising a face stock (28) serving as a flexible cover; a liner (26) serving as a flexible substrate; a first adhesive layer on the flexible substrate (i.e., an adhesive can be applied to the back side of the label, col. 9, lines 9-11); a radio frequency transponder (6) serving as a wireless communication system, a processor (18) coupled to the wireless communication system, an power source (20) coupled to the wireless communication system and the processor, and at least one memory serving as non-transitory processor-readable medium storing instructions which, when executed by the processor, configures the processor to perform operations comprising controlling the wireless communication system to communicate with one or more network nodes of an associated location tracking system to determine a location of the wireless communication device (col. 4, lines 22-48), wherein the radio frequency transponder, the processor, the energy source, and the memory located between the flexible cover and the flexible substrate (see figs. 1-4; col. 4, line 22- col. 5, line 10; col. 8, line 25- col. 9, line 35).
However, Howard fairly suggests that the intelligent label comprising a connection to a second device and a device layer for components of the devices.
Jacober teaches a RFID tag label (100) comprising an intermediate layer (122) serving as a device layer securing a RFID tag (106), and the RFID tag label (100) is a part of the roll of labels comprising a second label (118) and a third label (120)(see fig. 1-2; col. 4, lines 26-37; col. 5, lines 25-47).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the teachings of Jacober to the teachings of Howard in order to provide multiple labels with secured tags.
Re claim 2: Howard teaches a system comprising an intelligent label (2) serving as a first wireless communication device; and the first wireless communication device comprising a face stock (28) serving as a flexible cover; a liner (26) serving as a flexible substrate; a processor (18) and a radio frequency transponder (6) serving as a wireless communication system located between the flexible cover and the flexible substrate (see figs. 1-4; col. 4, line 22- col. 5, line 10; col. 8, line 25- col. 9, line 35).
However, Howard fairly suggests that the intelligent label comprising a second wireless communication device, a device layer, and a wake circuit.
Jacober teaches a RFID tag label (100) comprising an intermediate layer (122) serving as a device layer securing a RFID tag (106), and the RFID tag label (100) is a part of the roll of labels comprising a second label (118) serving as second wireless communication device, and a conductor (510) serving as a wake circuit, wherein the tearing off the perforation (508) will turn the RFID tag into different working state (fig. 5A-5C; col. 7, line 56-col. 8, line 24) (see fig. 1-2; col. 4, lines 26-37; col. 5, lines 25-47).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the teachings of Jacober to the teachings of Howard in order to provide multiple labels with secured tags. Also, such modification would provide an additional operating state, that is, the one operating state with an unseparated state and another operating state with an separated state (see col. 8, lines 50-67 of Jacober).
Although, Howard as modified by Jacober fails to teach that the tearing off the perforation line of the first device will transmit the state of second device.
However, it would have been an obvious design variation well within the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the design of label (500), that is, extending the conductor (510) to right side of the RFID tag (506) rather than extending to the left side of the RFID tag as shown in fig. 5A which the conductor (510) crossing the perorations for separating label (500) from the label on the right (see below figure), which transits the state of the adjacent communication device by tearing along the perforations, and therefore an obvious expedient.
PNG
media_image1.png
282
504
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Howard (US 6614392) in view of Jacober et al. (US 7212127) and Kato et al. (US 2017/0017872).
Howard teaches an intelligent label (2) serving as a wireless communication device comprising a face stock (28) serving as a flexible cover; a liner (26) serving as a flexible substrate; a radio frequency transponder (6) serving as a wireless communication system, a processor (18) coupled to the wireless communication system, and a power source (20) (i.e., the power source can be a thin battery, solar panel, or any other power source) serving as a cylindrical single cell battery coupled to the processor, and the wireless communication system, the cylindrical single cell battery configured to provide electrical power to the first wireless communication system and the processor, wherein the radio frequency transponder, the processor, and the power source located between the flexible cover and the flexible substrate (see figs. 1-4; col. 4, line 22- col. 5, line 10; col. 8, line 25- col. 9, line 35).
However, Howard fairly suggests that the intelligent label comprising a device layer for components of the devices.
Jacober teaches a RFID tag label (100) comprising an intermediate layer (122) serving as a device layer securing a RFID tag (106) (see fig. 1-2; col. 4, lines 26-37; col. 5, lines 25-47).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the teachings of Jacober to the teachings of Howard in order to provide secured tags.
However, Howard as modified by Jacober fairly suggest that the wireless communication device comprising a sensor.
Kato teaches a carrier tape comprising an electronic component (5) such as temperature sensor (see fig. 1; paragraph 0103).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the teachings of Kato to the teachings of Howard/Jacober in order to provide additional information such as temperature.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Nelson (US 2011/0285507) teaches a RFID tape.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEUNG H LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-2401. The examiner can normally be reached 7-4:00PM.
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, Steven Paik can be reached at 571-272-2404. 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.
/SEUNG H LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876