DETAILED ACTION
This is a Final Office Action in response to claims on 04/22/2026. Claims 1-15, 17-22 are pending. The effective filing date is 09/12/2023.
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
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/11/2024 and 01/30/2025 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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, 9-11, 18, 19, 21 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by WO 2022/173937 A1 Butler et al. (hereinafter Butler).
Regarding claim 1, Butler teaches an inventory management device (Butler Abstract, inventory management system), comprising:
a transportable frame, the transportable frame having a motor attachment surface (Butler [0071] plastic housing for RFID interrogator subsystem; see Fig. 5, the plastic housing has a slot for a bar (50) to attach);
a housing connected to the transportable frame, wherein the housing includes a read side with an outer perimeter at least partially defined by the transportable frame such that the housing and the transportable frame are configured to be transported together (Butler [0071] the interrogators are within the frame, attached to the housing, see Fig. 5, where there is a housing for the antennas attached to a frame for attachment to a rail system);
a radio frequency identification (RFID) interrogator located in the housing (Butler [0071] RFID interrogator device, see Fig. 5); and an RFID antenna located in the housing (Butler [0071] the support has the interrogator and antenna, see Fig. 5, element 12 is the interrogator and element 18 is the antenna).
Regarding claim 9, Butler teaches an inventory management system comprising the inventory management device of claim 1, wherein the system comprises: a plurality of passive location tags (Butler [0007-0008] the subsystem includes RFID tags, and those tags are associated with inventory items, and include identification and location of items within a warehouse); and a plurality of passive asset tags, wherein the RFID interrogator is configured to activate the plurality of passive location tags and the plurality of passive asset tags, and the RFID antenna is configured to receive return signals from the plurality of passive location tags and the plurality of passive asset tags (Butler [0007-0008] the subsystem includes RFID tags, and those tags are associated with inventory items, and include identification and location of items within a warehouse; [0060] the tags may be passive, and activate when near interrogator).
Regarding claim 10, Butler teaches the inventory management system of claim 9, wherein the inventory management device is configured to read one passive asset tag of the plurality of passive asset tags in a plurality of location areas to obtain a plurality of asset tag readings for the one passive asset tag (Butler [0016] an RFID tag is associated with a plurality of items).
Regarding claim 11, Roeder teaches the inventory management system of claim 10, wherein the inventory management device is configured to obtain a received signal strength indicator (RSSI) for each of the plurality of asset tag readings and use a highest RSSI to assign a location of the one passive asset tag (Butler [0137] using RSSI to determine signal strength and identify tags).
Regarding claim 18, Butler teaches an inventory management method using the inventory management device of claim 1, comprising the steps of: reading an asset tag in a plurality of location areas (Butler [0062] FID interrogator reads RFID tags); obtaining a received signal strength indicator (RSSI) for the asset tag in each of the location areas (Butler [0137] using RSSI to determine signal strength and identify tags); and using a highest RSSI obtained to assign a location of the asset tag (Butler [0137-0139] signal strength for tag reading).
Regarding claim 19, Butler teaches a non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium storing instructions thereon that when executed by one or more electronic processors causes the one or more electronic processors to carry out the method of claim 18 (Butler [0111] network for data storage).
Regarding claim 21, Butler teaches the inventory management device of claim 1, wherein the RFID interrogator includes an electronic processor and memory with the RFID interrogator in the housing (Butler [0065] the system includes a processor and memory).
Regarding claim 22, Butler teaches the inventory management device of claim 21, further comprising a power source located in the housing for the RFID interrogator (Butler [0073] battery to power the system).
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.
Claims 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Butler in view of US 2006/0255950 A1 Roeder et al. (hereinafter Roeder).
Regarding claim 2, Butler teaches the inventory management device of claim 1, wherein the motor attachment surface is part of a longitudinally extending slot in a base of the transportable frame (Butler [0071] the housing includes an opening so a rail system may be placed inside the housing, see Fig. 5). Butler fails to explicitly disclose the longitudinally extending slot being sized to accommodate one or more forks of a forklift. Roeder is in the field of RFID antenna (Abstract) and teaches the longitudinally extending slot being sized to accommodate one or more forks of a forklift (Roeder [0054-0055] the system includes a support structure, which includes cutouts to house the antenna components and has a slot to attach to a tine of a forklift, the slot for the forklift is the motor attachment surface; Fig. 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the rail system attachment of Butler with the ability to attach to a forklift as taught by Roeder. The motivation for doing so would be to attach RFID readers to where the items that need to be read are located (Roeder [0013] forklift can move throughout warehouse to read tags on items).
Claims 3-6, 12-15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Butler in view of US 2018/0075268 A1 Jun (hereinafter Jun).
Regarding claim 3, Butler teaches the inventory management device of claim 1. Butler fails to explicitly disclose further comprising a second RFID antenna located in the housing, wherein each of the first and the second RFID antennas have a longitudinal axis and a width axis, with the longitudinal axis being longer than the width axis, wherein the first RFID antenna is orthogonally offset from the second RFID antenna.
Jun is in the field of scanning inventories (Jun Abstract, scanning shelves) and teaches further comprising a second RFID antenna located in the housing, wherein each of the first and the second RFID antennas have a longitudinal axis and a width axis, with the longitudinal axis being longer than the width axis, wherein the first RFID antenna is orthogonally offset from the second RFID antenna (Jun [0095-0096] the antennas include a vertical and horizontal antenna, making them orthogonal to each other). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the antenna of Butler with the position taught by Jun. The motivation for doing so would be to provide moveable antennas in order to reduce the cost associated by eliminating the need to update pre-existing shelving (Jun [0014] the antenna can be moved, and can fit pre-existing shelves and eliminate the need to renovate).
Regarding claim 4 and 13, Butler teaches the inventory management device of claim 3. Butler fails to explicitly disclose wherein a third RFID antenna is located in the housing and a fourth RFID antenna is located in the housing. Jun teaches wherein a third RFID antenna is located in the housing and a fourth RFID antenna is located in the housing (Jun [0242] the system includes 4 RFID antennas). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the antenna of Butler with the multiple antennas of Jun. The motivation for doing so would be to include enough antennas to read a plurality of different display set up, to avoid the costly updates to remodel storage facility shelving (Jun [0013-0014]).
Regarding claim 5 and 14, Butler teaches the inventory management device of claim 4. Butler fails to explicitly disclose wherein a blocking partition at least partially separates the first and the second RFID antennas from the third and the fourth RFID antennas.
Jun teaches a blocking partition at least partially separates the first and the second RFID antennas from the third and the fourth RFID antennas (Jun [0364] a blocking layer may be placed on the outer side of a scanner). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the antenna of Butler with the blocking layer of Jun. The motivation for doing so would be to prevent scanning errors by preventing interference (Jun [0057] blocking o prevent scanning errors).
Regarding claim 6 and 15, Butler teaches the inventory management device of claim 5. Butler fails to explicitly disclose wherein the first and the second RFID antennas and the third and the fourth RFID antennas are symmetrically arranged with respect to the blocking partition. Jun teaches wherein the first and the second RFID antennas and the third and the fourth RFID antennas are symmetrically arranged with respect to the blocking partition (Jun [0259-0260] the blocking function of the body in relation to multiple antenna, see Fig. 2, blocking layer 1022, and he different antennas 1024, which include both horizonal and vertical antenna). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the antenna of Butler with the blocking layer of Jun. The motivation for doing so would be to prevent scanning errors by preventing interference (Jun [0057] blocking o prevent scanning errors).
Regarding claim 12, Butler teaches an inventory management device (Butler Abstract, inventory management system), comprising: a transportable frame having a motor attachment surface (Butler [0071] plastic housing for RFID interrogator subsystem; see Fig. 5, the plastic housing has a slot for a bar (50) to attach);
a housing connected to the transportable frame, wherein the housing includes a read side with an outer perimeter at least partially defined by the transportable frame such that the housing and the transportable frame are configured to be transported together (Butler [0071] the interrogators are within the frame, attached to the housing, see Fig. 5, where there is a housing for the antennas attached to a frame for attachment to a rail system);
a radio frequency identification (RFID) interrogator located in the housing (Butler [0071] RFID interrogator device, see Fig. 5);
a first RFID antenna located in the housing (Butler [0071] the support has the interrogator and antenna, see Fig. 5, element 12 is the interrogator and element 18 is the antenna). Butler fails to explicitly disclose a second RFID antenna located in the housing, wherein each of the first and the second RFID antennas have a longitudinal axis and a width axis, with the longitudinal axis being longer than the width axis, wherein the first RFID antenna is orthogonally offset from the second RFID antenna.
Jun teaches a second RFID antenna located in the housing, wherein each of the first and the second RFID antennas have a longitudinal axis and a width axis, with the longitudinal axis being longer than the width axis, wherein the first RFID antenna is orthogonally offset from the second RFID antenna (Jun [0095-0096] the antennas include a vertical and horizontal antenna, making them orthogonal to each other). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the antenna of Butler with the position taught by Jun. The motivation for doing so would be to provide moveable antennas in order to reduce the cost associated by eliminating the need to update pre-existing shelving (Jun [0014] the antenna can be moved, and can fit pre-existing shelves and eliminate the need to renovate).
Regarding claim 17, Roeder teaches the inventory management device of claim 12, wherein the motor attachment surface is part of a longitudinally extending slot in a base of the transportable frame, the longitudinally extending slot being sized to accommodate one or more forks of a forklift (Roeder [0054-0055] the system includes a support structure, which includes cutouts to house the antenna components and has a slot to attach to a tine of a forklift, the slot for the forklift is the motor attachment surface; Fig. 1).
Claims 7, 8 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Butler in view of US 2021/0150462 A1 Leitermann et al. (hereinafter Leitermann).
Regarding claim 7, Butler teaches the inventory management device of claim 1. Butler fails to explicitly disclose wherein the RFID interrogator is configured to transmit an output power of 2 watts or more.
Leitermann is in the field of RFID readers (Leitermann Abstract, RFID readers) and teaches wherein the RFID interrogator is configured to transmit an output power of 2 watts or more (Leitermann [0039] the power of the signal can be 1-5 watts). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the RFID interrogator of Butler with the power teaching of Leitermann. The motivation for doing so would be to allow for the power level that is necessary to each a specific distance, the longer distance requires new power (Leitermann [0054] longer distance needs more power).
Regarding claim 8, Butler teaches the inventory management device of claim 7. Butler fails to explicitly disclose wherein the RFID interrogator is configured to transmit the output power at 4 watts or more. Leitermann teaches wherein the RFID interrogator is configured to transmit the output power at 4 watts or more (Leitermann [0039] the power of the signal can be 1-5 watts). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the RFID interrogator of Butler with the power teaching of Leitermann. The motivation for doing so would be to allow for the power level that is necessary to each a specific distance, the longer distance requires new power (Leitermann [0054] longer distance needs more power).
Regarding claim 20, Butler teaches the inventory management method of claim 18.
Butler fails to explicitly disclose wherein an inventory management device performs the reading and obtaining steps, the inventory management device having a transportable frame and a radio frequency identification (RFID) interrogator, wherein the RFID interrogator transmits an output power of 2 watts or more.
Leitermann teaches wherein an inventory management device performs the reading and obtaining steps, the inventory management device having a transportable frame and a radio frequency identification (RFID) interrogator (Leitermann [0090-0091] the interrogation readers for signals, using RSSI, and RFID readers, see tag A and B; Fig. 11A, housing with two separate antennas), wherein the RFID interrogator transmits an output power of 2 watts or more (Leitermann [0039] the power of the signal can be 1-5 watts). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the RFID interrogator of Butler with the power teaching of Leitermann. The motivation for doing so would be to allow for the power level that is necessary to each a specific distance, the longer distance requires new power (Leitermann [0054] longer distance needs more power).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/22/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The claim amendments make clear that the housing and frame are separate entities, and therefore the previous Roeder prior art has been removed, and new reference Butler has been applied, which showcases that there is a cylindrical entity with an interior hole to attach to a transportable rod, and that is partially attached to the housing for the RFID interrogator and antenna. The orthogonally oriented antennas are now taught by Jun, which shows multiple antennas at a variety of different angles to be able to read multiple tags within the store.
The new claims are also found in the new art of Butler, in that it includes a processor, memory and battery to power the interrogator and antenna.
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2006/0243174 A1 Muirhead teaches orthogonal RFID sensors (Fig. 10).
US 2012/0242481 A1 Gernandt et al. teaches locating tagged items (Abstract).
US 2016/0260301 A1 Miller et al. teaches asset management (Abstract).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JESSICA E SULLIVAN whose telephone number is (571)272-9501. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th; 9:00 AM-5PM 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 OBEID can be reached at (571) 270-3324. 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.
/JESSICA E SULLIVAN/ Examiner, Art Unit 3627
/FAHD A OBEID/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3627
Prosecution Insights