DETAILED ACTION
1. This is the first action on the merits relating to U.S. Application Serial No. 18/983,516 filed on December 17, 2024. Currently claims 1-17 remain in the examination.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
2. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
3. Applicant’s disclosure of related application information and claiming benefit of US provisional application as described in paragraph [0001] of the specification is acknowledged.
Claim Objections
4. Claims 2, 4, 9, 11, 14, and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 2, line 2: please replace “Mode 2 RFID standard” to “ISO 18000-3 mode 2 RFID standard,” and “Mode 3 RFID standard” to “ISO 18000-3 mode 3 RFID standard.”
Please amend claims 4, 9, 11, 14, and 15 in the same manner as claim 2.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. Claims 1, 3, 5-8, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2014/0203989 A1 to JEONG et al. (hereinafter “JEONG”).
Regarding claims 1 and 7, JEONG discloses a dual standard RFID chip 400 (see figure 4) that is used in a casino or gaming environment (see paragraphs 0022 and 0023) comprising a carrier body (see figure 4); a first RFID chip on the top side and a second RFID chip on the bottom side; and the top side uses UHF protocol (see paragraph 0062) and the bottom side uses HF protocol (see paragraph 0063). Also see figure 3.
Regarding claim 3, as shown in figures 3 and 4, the first RFID chip is on one side (top of bottom) and the second RFID chip is on the other side.
Regarding claim 5, although not explicitly stated, the casino/gaming chip would have a thickness, and the middle portion of the chip would serve as a carrier spacer recited in this claim.
Regarding claim 6, see the description for claim 1 above. The RFID tag 120 is read by the RFID reader 110 comprising memory (see paragraph 0006); and the RFID tag stores unique information (see paragraph 0034).
Regarding claims 8 and 10, the unique information is associated with the both protocols (see paragraph 0034).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
8. 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.
9. 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.
10. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
11. Claims 2, 4, 9, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2014/0203989 A1 to JEONG et al. in view of US 2011/0148985 A1 to Bae et al. (hereinafter “Bae”).
The teachings of JEONG have been discussed above,
JEONG, however, fails to discloses or suggested that the two protocols that are used not according to ISO 18000-3 mode 2 RFID standard and ISO 18000-3 mode 3 RFID standard even if they are UHF and HF frequency.
Bae discloses a RFID system and the method of recognizing a plurality of RFID tags at a high speed (see abstract). Bae further discloses that UHF is according to ISO 18000-3 mode 3 RFID standard, and HF is ISO 18000-3 mode 2 RFID standard (see paragraphs 0012 and 0013).
In view of Bae’s disclosure, it is obvious to one ordinary skill in the art to use already existing standard for the UHF and HF protocol of JEONG. Using the standard protocol in the chip would render the chip readily usable in many other embodiments, an obvious expedient to one ordinary skill in the art.
Allowable Subject Matter
12. Claims 12, 13, 16, and 17 are allowed. Claims 14 and 15 would also be allowable if the objections are overcome.
13. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claims are directed at a method, comprising:
assigning a common record ID to a single dual standard RFID chip;
registering first and second RFID chip identifiers of respective first and second RFID chips to the common record ID;
associating the common record ID to a player identity of a player;
utilizing by the player the single dual standard RFID chip in a wagering activity at an electronic gaming table;
reading with an RFID standard reader associated with the electronic gaming table one of the first and second RFID chips;
associating the RFID chip identifier of the read one of the first and second RFID chips to the common record ID; and updating a casino database to reflect the wagering activity of the player associated with the common record ID.
Such a method is neither disclosed nor suggested by the cited references. The limitations in the dependent claims are also allowable.
Conclusion
The pertinent prior arts made of record but not relied are listed in the attached form PTO-892. These are considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure. Applicant is respectfully suggested to carefully review these references.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ahshik Kim whose telephone number is (571)272-2393. The examiner can normally be reached between the hours of 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM Monday thru Friday. Examiner’s fax phone number is (571)273-2393.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Michael G. Lee, can be reached on (571)272-2398. The fax phone number for this Group is (571)273-8300.
Communications via Internet e-mail regarding this application, other than those under 35 U.S.C. 132 or which otherwise require a signature, may be used by the applicant and should be addressed to [ahshik.kim@uspto.gov].
PTO employees do not engage in Internet communications where there exists a possibility that sensitive information could be identified or exchanged unless the record includes a properly signed express waiver of the confidentiality requirements of 35 U.S.C. 122. This is more clearly set forth in the Interim Internet Usage Policy published in the Official Gazette of the Patent and Trademark on February 25, 1997 at 1195 OG 89.
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.
/AHSHIK KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876
January 6, 2026