DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim status
Claims 1-13 are currently pending for examination.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “authentication member” in line 8 should be “an authentication member”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: “operation member” in line 2 should be “an operation member”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “locking device configured to – corresponding to element 13 in Fig. 2”, “operation unit configured to – corresponding to element 20 in Fig. 2”, “control device configured to – corresponding to element 30 in Fig. 2”, “display unit configured to – corresponding to element 22 in Fig. 3” in claims 1, 2, 9 and 12.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2-7 and 10-13 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 2, the phrase "particularly" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). The word "particularly" should be deleted.
Claims 10 and 13 recites the limitation "the boxes" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 3-7 and 11-13 depend on claim 2. Claims 3-7 and 11-13 are also indefinite because they depend on a base claim that is indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
9. 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 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.
10. 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.
11. Claims 1 and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Amdahl (US 2016/0133074).
For claim 1, Amdahl discloses a locker apparatus comprising:
a box capable of accommodating items therein [E.g. 0040: The locker bank 108 includes one or more lockers 106 and at least one locker terminal 104. Each locker 106 includes an enclosure 202 has an interior 204 that is accessible through an opening 206 defined by the enclosure 202];
a door configured to open and close the box [E.g. 0040: Each locker 106 includes a door 208 that is moveable between a closed position and an open position];
a locking device configured to unlockably lock the door [E.g. 0040: Each locker 106 also includes an electromechanically actuated lock 210 in communication with the locker terminal 104. The lock 210 is configured to secure the door 208 in the closed position when engaged and to release the door 208, allowing the door to move freely between the open and closed positions when disengaged];
an operation unit configured to receive an operation by a user [E.g. 0041: the locker terminal 104 includes a communication interface 214, a processor 216, memory 218, and a code entry device 220, 0042: he code entry device 220 reads or scans a machine readable external ID code 116 from the encoded item 112 or allows users to manually enter a human readable external ID code 116 or an additional security code, such as a personal identification number (PIN). Examples of suitable code entry devices 220 for reading machine readable external ID codes 116 include, but are not limited to, barcode readers, magnetic strip readers, radio frequency identification tag readers, scanners, and cameras. Examples of suitable code entry devices 220 for entering human readable external ID codes 116 include, without limitation, keypads, keyboards, and touchscreens. Various implementation of the locker terminal 104 include additional input devices 222, 0043-0044]; and
a control device configured to control the locking device in response to an operation on the operation unit by the user [E.g. 0025: The locker manager 102 provides locker management functionality including, but not limited to, authenticating requests to access lockers, associating external ID codes with locker rights, tracking locker usage, and, optionally, sending signals or messages controlling access to lockers (e.g., unlocking lockers), 0043: A locker 106 is accessed by scanning or manually entering the external ID code 116 from the encoded item 112 using the code entry device 220. The locker 106 communicates with the locker manager 102 to determine whether access to the locker 106 is authorized. If authorization is received from the locker manager 102, the locker terminal 104 selectively unlocks the lock 210 of the assigned locker 106], wherein
the operation unit includes authentication member configured to authenticate the user [E.g. 0005: The locker terminal generally provides a local user interface for accessing lockers. Aspects of the locker terminal include a code entry device. A locker is accessed by scanning or manually entering the external ID code using the code entry device. The locker terminal request access to a locker by sending the external ID code and other pertinent to the locker manager. If authorization is received from the locker manager, the locker terminal selectively unlocks the lock of the authorized locker, 0029: The locker manager 102 is configured to utilize the unique or semi-unique external ID codes 116 provided to users for purposes other than locker rental and, optionally, the locker access codes 114. The external ID codes 116 are often associated with encoded items 112, such as, without limitation, admission tickets, keycards, wristbands, identification cards, and passes provided to users. The encoded item 112 may be provided either physically (e.g., a printed ticket) or electronically (e.g., an e-ticket displayable using a mobile phone or tablet). The external ID codes 116 may be written to or on the encoded items 112 in a machine readable format, a human readable format, or both (e.g., stored as a digital code or printed as a barcode); 0042],
the control device is configured to lock the locking device in order to lock the door into a closed state except when the item is deposited in the box and when the item is taken out from the box [E.g. 0040: he locker bank 108 includes one or more lockers 106 and at least one locker terminal 104. Each locker 106 includes an enclosure 202 has an interior 204 that is accessible through an opening 206 defined by the enclosure 202. Each locker 106 includes a door 208 that is moveable between a closed position and an open position. For example, the door 208 may pivot between the open position and the closed position. When in the closed position, the door 208 substantially blocks the access opening 206 to inhibit access to the enclosure interior 204. When in the open position, the door 208 does not block the access opening 206 enabling free access to the enclosure interior 204. Each locker 106 also includes an electromechanically actuated lock 210 in communication with the locker terminal 104. The lock 210 is configured to secure the door 208 in the closed position when engaged and to release the door 208, allowing the door to move freely between the open and closed positions when disengaged. The lockers 106 may optionally include one or more sensors 212 in communication with the locker terminal 104 to detect selected conditions and provide information about the locker state. For example, the lockers 106 may include a door position sensor to determine whether the locker door 208 is open or closed or an occupancy sensor to determine whether the locker 106 is in use (i.e., whether any physical objects are located within the enclosure 202), 0046],
the operation unit includes an interface that can be operated by the user in order to give an instruction to reopen the door [E.g. 0041-0044, 0011], and
when the interface is operated within a predetermined time after the item is deposited in the box, the door is closed, and the locking device is locked once, the control device unlocks the locking device, on a condition that authentication of the user by the authentication member is established, in order to permit the door to be reopened, and locks the locking device again when the door is closed thereafter [E.g. 0046: Locker status indications include whether the locker 106 is available, rented, occupied, reserved, disabled, damaged, locked, or unlocked and whether the allotted rental period has expired or a grace period is active. An example of a grace period is period of extra time allocated for a locker rental beyond the specified rental period communicated to the renter. The availability of a grace period may not be guaranteed and may depend on whether there is immediate need for the locker 106…, 0005: The locker terminal generally provides a local user interface for accessing lockers. Aspects of the locker terminal include a code entry device. A locker is accessed by scanning or manually entering the external ID code using the code entry device. The locker terminal request access to a locker by sending the external ID code and other pertinent to the locker manager. If authorization is received from the locker manager, the locker terminal selectively unlocks the lock of the authorized locker, 0040-0043].
Amdahl fails to expressly disclose that the stored item is a luggage and that the interface is a reopening door button.
Although Amdahl fails to expressly disclose that the stored item is a luggage and that the interface is a reopening door button, Amdahl teaches storing items in lockers and using an interface to open/close the locker door [see analysis above]. However, having the stored item as a luggage and that the interface is a reopening door button fails to yield unexpected results; it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Amdahl to have the stored item as luggage and that the interface is a reopening door button s in order to satisfy system needs and/or environment requirement, also because such modification would have been considered a mere design consideration which fails to patentable distinguish over Amdahl.
For claim 8, Although Amdahl fails to expressly disclose wherein the predetermined time for permitting the door to be reopened is 15 minutes after the locking device is locked once, Amdahl teaches wherein predetermined time and a grace period of extra time for permitting the door to be reopened after the locking device is locked once [E.g. 0046]. However, having the predetermined time to be 15 minutes fails to yield unexpected results; it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Amdahl to have the predetermined time to be 15 minutes in order to satisfy system needs and/or environment requirement, also because such modification would have been considered a mere design consideration which fails to patentable distinguish over Amdahl.
For claim 9, Amdahl discloses wherein the control device is configured to permit the door to be reopened multiple times within the predetermined time [E.g. 0011, 0046; it is also implied that the user can request to open the door more the one time during the rental period of the locker].
For claim 10, Amdahl discloses wherein, if there are a plurality of the boxes in which the luggage has been deposited by the same user, the control device unlocks the locking device corresponding to only the box selected through an operation on the operation unit [E.g. 0051-0052].
Allowable Subject Matter
12. Claims 2-7 and 11-13 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
13. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure: see PTO-892 Notice of Reference Cited.
14. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMED BARAKAT whose telephone number is (571)270-3696. The examiner can normally be reached on 9:00am-5:00PM.
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, Davetta Goins can be reached on (571) 272-2957. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MOHAMED BARAKAT/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2689