DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the application filed on October 31, 2024.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been examined.
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 therefor, 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 a judicial exception (i.e., an abstract idea) without “significantly more.”
Regarding Claims 1, 8 and 15, the claims describe a system and method for age verification at a point of sale which is a mental process (observation/evaluation) and a method of organizing a human activity (commercial interaction-sales). The limitations on acquiring customer’s information, determining an age of the customer, registering an item, generating image for item registration (text), registering an item, generating image indicating that customer’s age needs to be verified (text), determining an age-restricted item, suspending item registration and processing purchase of an item could be all performed in the human mind and/or with the help of paper and pencil. Other than reciting a scanner, a display and a processor, nothing in the claim precludes the steps for being performed in the human mind and/or the help of paper and pencil. All the steps of “determining”, “registering”, “generating”, “suspending” and “processing”, recite functions directed to sales activities and commercial interactions. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The computers are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Generic computer components performing generic computer functions alone, do not amount to significantly more that an abstract idea. Simply implementing the abstract idea on a generic computer environment is not a practical application of the abstract idea and does not take the claim out of the mental process and method of organizing a human activity grouping. Moreover, when viewed as a whole with such additional elements considered as an ordered combination, the claim modified by adding generic computer components would be nothing more than a purely conventional computerized implementation of applicant's customer age verification method in the general field of point of sales systems and would not provide significantly more than the judicial exception itself. The claims are directed to an abstract idea.
The claims do not include additional elements that even in combination are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above, with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using computers to perform the determining, registering, generating, suspending and processing steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using generic computer components cannot provide an inventive concept. There are no improvements to technology or any new technology involved. The claims are not patent eligible.
Regarding dependent claims 2-7, 9-14 and 16-20, these claims are directed to limitations which serve to limit the components, the processing steps and the information used. These claims neither introduce a new abstract idea nor additional limitations which are significantly more than an abstract idea. They provide descriptive details that offer helpful context, but have no impact on statutory subject matter eligibility.
Therefore, the limitations on the invention, when viewed individually and in ordered combination are directed to in-eligible subject matter.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over May (US 2005/0137987 A1) in view of Morrison (EP 0991027 A2).
Claim 1
May discloses the following limitations:
A point-of-sale (POS) terminal for registering an item for purchase at a store, the POS terminal comprising: a scanner; a display; and a processor configured to: at a beginning of a transaction, upon input of a customer code via the scanner, acquire customer information regarding a customer associated with the customer code, (see at least paragraph 0008-a device reads encoded data relating to an individual).
determine an age of the customer based on the acquired customer information, (see at least paragraph 0009-age related information).
and determine whether the age of the customer is a predetermined age or older, upon determining that the age of the customer is the predetermined age or older, start a first process for registering an item, the first process including: generating a first screen image for item registration including first information indicating that the age of the customer has been verified, and controlling the display to display the first screen image, (see at least paragraphs 0027 and 0030-display unit indicating that an individual is of legal age).
and upon input of an item code via the scanner when the first screen image is displayed, registering an item associated with the item code regardless of whether the item is an age-restricted item, (see at least paragraph 0043-registering items).
upon determining that the age of the customer is not the predetermined age or older, (see at least paragraph 0010-age restricted items are flagged upon determining that a buyer is less than a specific age).
generating a second screen image for item registration including second information indicating that the age of the customer needs to be verified, and controlling the display to display the second screen image, (see at least paragraphs 0029 and 0030-displaying purchase and age information).
upon input of an item code via the scanner when the second screen image is displayed, determining whether an item associated with the item code is an age-restricted item, (see at least paragraph 0043-determining whether an individual meets a required age).
upon determining that the item is an age-restricted item, suspending the item registration not registering the age-restricted item, and upon determining that the item is not an age-restricted item, registering the item, (see at least paragraph 0043-alert an authority of an illegal purchase attempt).
and in response to a predetermined operation, perform a payment process on the registered item. (see at least paragraph 0028-completion of a sale).
May discloses a system that automatically verifies customer’s age before registering an age restricted item and alarms authorities when a customer below a required age attempts to purchase an age restricted item. May does not explicitly disclose the following limitations.
until a code of a store clerk is input via the scanner, and after the code of the store clerk is input, registering
depending on an operation by the store clerk
However, suspending a transaction until store clerk manual override is known in the field of point of sales systems. Morrison, which is analogous art in at least paragraph 0061 discloses suspending a transaction until store personnel audits or investigates a customer’s transaction. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings in May and Morrison because the lacking limitation is just a matter of design choice. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have conceived the idea of creating such configuration. Moreover, the claimed subject matter would have been no more than a predictable combination of known techniques according to their respective purposes within routine skill and creativity.
Claim 2
May does not explicitly disclose the following limitation:
wherein the processor is configured to, after determining that the item is an age-restricted item, control the display to display a message indicating that a store clerk has been called.
However, since Morrison discloses calling a store clerk for intervention, to display a message indicating that a store clerk has been called would have been an obvious design choice in view of the teachings. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings in May and Morrison because the lacking limitation is just a matter of design choice. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have conceived the idea of creating such configuration. Moreover, the claimed subject matter would have been no more than a predictable combination of known techniques according to their respective purposes within routine skill and creativity.
Claim 3
Furthermore, May discloses the following limitations:
further comprising: a communication interface connectable to a terminal held by a store clerk, wherein the processor is configured to, after determining that the item is an age-restricted item, control the communication interface to transmit a notification to the terminal held by the store clerk (see at least paragraph 0010).
Claim 4
Furthermore, May discloses the following limitations:
wherein the first screen image includes: a first area for displaying text or an image corresponding to the first information, a second area in which one or more registered items are listed, and a third area in which a total amount of the registered items is displayed. (see at least paragraphs 0029-0030).
Claim 5
Furthermore, May discloses the following limitations:
wherein the second screen image includes: a first area for displaying text or an image corresponding to the second information, a second area in which one or more registered items are listed, and a third area in which a total amount of the registered items is displayed. (see at least paragraphs 0029-0030).
Claim 6
Furthermore, May discloses the following limitations:
further comprising: a communication interface connectable to a store server installed in the store, wherein the processor is configured to control the communication interface to transmit the input customer code to the store server, and then receive the customer information associated with the customer code from the store server. (see at least paragraph 0026).
Claim 7
Furthermore, May discloses the following limitations:
wherein the POS terminal is a self-service POS terminal. (see at least paragraphs 0034 and 0043).
As per claims 8-20, claims 8-20 recite substantially similar limitations to claims 1-7 and are therefore rejected using the same art and rationale set forth above.
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. Kaneko (US 2021/0090064 A1) in at least paragraph 0027 discloses intervention by a clerk to permit a purchase of age restricted items.
CONCLUSION
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DENISSE Y ORTIZ ROMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5506. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9-7.
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 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.
/DENISSE Y ORTIZ ROMAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3627 /ARIEL J YU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627