DETAILED ACTION
This is a Non-Final Office Action in response to Claims on 12/20/2024. Claims 1-20 are pending. The effective filing date is 12/20/2024.
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 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 an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1- Claims 1-8 are directed to an apparatus, a system, which is a category of statutory subject matter. Claims 9-16 are directed to a method, which is a category of statutory subject matter. Claims 17-20 are directed to a non-transitory computer-readable medium, which is an article of manufacture, which is a category of statutory subject matter. Claims 1-20 pass step 1.
Step 2A, Prong 1-The independent claim 1, and similarly claim 9 and 17, recite:
An apparatus for processing items at a checkout station, comprising:
a housing (additional elements to be processed under Step 2A, Prong 2);
a scale assembly positioned at least partially within the housing and supporting a weigh platter (additional elements to be processed under Step 2A, Prong 2);
a vision assembly having a field of view extending at least partially over the weigh platter (additional elements to be processed under Step 2A, Prong 2);
a processor communicatively coupled with the scale assembly and the vision assembly (additional elements to be processed under Step 2A, Prong 2); and
a memory communicatively coupled with the processor and storing instructions that, when executed by the processor (additional elements to be processed under Step 2A, Prong 2), cause the apparatus to:
capture, via the vision assembly, at least one image frame before a time T, wherein the time T is a time when the scale assembly is reporting a stable, non-zero weight (capturing an image is the act of obtaining information, and can be considered the abstract idea of mental processing, see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(A) a claim to "collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis," where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016));
capture, via the vision assembly, an image frame during the time T (capturing an image is the act of obtaining information, and can be considered the abstract idea of mental processing, see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(A) a claim to "collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis," where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016));
analyze, via the processor, the image frame captured during time T to attempt to identify an item within the field of view of the vision assembly (analyzing an image at a high level of generality can be done in the mind, and therefore is grouped as a mental process, see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(A) a claim to "collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis," where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016));
responsive to successfully identifying the item from the image frame captured during time T, transmit item-associated data to a host (transmitting the results of the analysis of information is that act of displaying certain results of the analysis of data, which is grouped as a mental process, see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(A) a claim to "collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis," where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016)); and
responsive to not being able to identify the item from the image frame captured during time T, analyze, via the processor, the at least one image frame captured before the time T to identify the item and transmit item-associated data to the host (making a decisions about the identification is another analysis of the image data, which is a mental process, see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(A) a claim to "collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis," where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016)).
Additionally, the claim as a whole is directed to the act of analyzing images specifically in the role of identification of items in a checkout terminal. This is a commercial interaction, specifically related to sales activities between a consumer and a business, and the steps of analysis can also be considered an abstract idea under MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II)(B).
Step 2A, Prong 2- The additional elements of independent claim 1, and similarly claim 9 and 17, include a checkout station, a housing, a scale assembly, a vision assembly, a processor, a memory, and non-transitory computer-readable medium. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the elements are presented as a means to generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular environment, or uses those elements as tools to perform the abstract idea. Under MPEP 2106.05(h) when the additional elements, especially the checkout station and housing, are presented to showcase that the analysis takes place within a store for he purpose of identifying objects for purchase, and therefore link the abstract identification to the technical field of a retail store. Under MPEP 2106.05(f) when the additional elements are used as tools to perform the abstract idea, such as the scale to receive weight information, a vision assembly to receive image information, a processor to process an analysis, and memories to store instructions, all perform as intended, and therefore are being used as tools to perform their purpose.
Step 2B-The independent claim 1, and similarly claim 9 and 17, do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because either alone or combined, the elements are used as tools to perform the abstract idea, or provide a technical environment for the abstract idea to be performed within.
Dependent Claims
Claims 2-3, 10-11, 18-19, add an indicia imaging assembly and decoder module. Both are instruments used to retrieve information, and the retrieval of information is collecting data, which is a mental process. The additional elements used as the tools to perform the abstract idea of collecting data, and therefore do not provide integration into a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea.
Claims 4-5, 12-13 adds details to the housing of the checkout system. The housing is described as the technical environment in which the dentification of objects is being performed, and therefore they continue to fail to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application, or provide significantly more than the abstract idea.
Claims 6, 14, adds a wakeup system that helps transition the computer from sleep to awake. This is an additional element to be analyzed under Step 2A, prong 2, and is part of the computer that is used to process the abstract idea. The computer being a tool, and the ability for a computer to be turned on and off, is part of its functionality, and the abstract idea does not improve its functioning, or do more than be applied to the computer.
Claims 7, 15, adds an object tracking system, which tracks objects in the field of view. The ability to track an object can also be done with the human eye, and therefore, can be done in the mind, and is grouped as a mental process of analyzing a persons surroundings. The use of a tracking system to perform the task of tracking, issuing the additional element as a tool to perform the abstract idea of tracking, and therefore fails to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or provide significantly more.
Claims 8, 16, 20 adds prompting a user to reposition an item, which is instructing a person, and is grouped as a certain method of organizing human activity. The prompt is being performed on the apparatus, and the apparatus is the tool to perform the abstract idea, and fail to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or provide significantly more.
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 1-7, 9-15, and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2024/0412188 A1 Holub et al. (hereinafter Holub) in view of US 2013/0248593 A1 Bonner et al. (hereinafter Bonner).
Regarding claim 1, 9 and 17 Holub teaches an apparatus for processing items at a checkout station (Holub Abstract, retail checkout system), comprising:
a housing (Holub [0089] specific checkout surface to place items);
a scale assembly positioned at least partially within the housing and supporting a weigh platter (Holub [0183] a weigh scale in the checkout surface);
a vision assembly having a field of view extending at least partially over the weigh platter (Holub [0185] first and second camera to capture images of checkout surface; See Fig. 1);
a processor communicatively coupled with the scale assembly and the vision assembly (Holub [0326] general purpose processors); and
a memory communicatively coupled with the processor and storing instructions that, when executed by the processor (Holub [0326] the processor includes a memory device), cause the apparatus to:
capture, via the vision assembly, at least one image frame before a time T, (Holub [0069] detecting items during a stationary time; [0135] the weight may be the sensor to trigger identification);
capture, via the vision assembly, an image frame during the time T (Holub [0140 capturing image of the checkout surface);
analyze, via the processor, the image frame captured during time T to attempt to identify an item within the field of view of the vision assembly (Holub [0146-0147] barcode read in imagery to identify the object);
responsive to successfully identifying the item from the image frame captured during time T, transmit item-associated data to a host (Holub [0148] once the item is identified it enables the retailer to compile a list); and
responsive to not being able to identify the item from the image frame captured during time T, analyze, via the processor, the at least one image frame captured before the time T to identify the item and transmit item-associated data to the host (Holub [0169-0170] if the object is not identified, then more methods are applied to identify the object, such as comparing colors to database of stock images of similar items).
Holub fails to explicitly disclose wherein the time T is a time when the scale assembly is reporting a stable, non-zero weight.
Bonner is in the field of object identification (Bonner abstract, identifying an object) and teaches wherein the time T is a time when the scale assembly is reporting a stable, non-zero weight (Bonner [0188] the sample is taken during a stable scale reading). 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 triggering of image identification by the scale in Holub, by timing the imagery by identifying a stable scale reading as taught by Bonner. The motivation for doing so would be to have a stable object to obtain a clear image to reduce the number of errors that would require human intervention (Bonner [0003] using methods to lower errors).
Regarding claim 2, 10, and 18, Holub teaches the apparatus of claim 1, further comprising an indicia imaging assembly and a decoder module, wherein image data captured by the indicia imaging assembly is processed by the decoder module, and wherein image data captured by the vision assembly is processed by an item identification module (Holub [0130-0132] the entire system can include the detection module, which uses barcodes to identify the object, and the segmentation module which analyzes the images).
Regarding claim 3, 11, and 19, Holub teaches the apparatus of claim 2, wherein the decoder module and the item identification module reside on separate physical circuits (Holub [0130-0132] the entire system can include the detection module, which uses barcodes to identify the object, and the segmentation module which analyzes the images).
Regarding claim 4 and 12, Holub teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the housing includes a lower portion and a tower portion, and wherein the field of view of the vision assembly extends through a window of the tower portion (Holub [0081] the system includes two windows and two surfaces, to look through the platen portion and tower portion).
Regarding claim 5 and 13, Holub teaches the apparatus of claim 4, wherein the scale assembly is positioned within the lower portion of the housing (Holub [0183] a weigh scale in the checkout surface).
Regarding claim 6 and 14, Holub teaches the apparatus of claim 1, further comprising a wakeup system operable to transition the apparatus from a sleep state to an awake state, and wherein capturing the at least one image frame before the time T, commences in response to the apparatus entering the awake state (Holub [0135] the imaging of the system may be an event driven, meaning that the active capturing of images is triggered by a change in weight sensed).
Regarding claim 7 and 15, Holub teaches the apparatus of claim 1, further comprising an object tracking system operable to track objects through the field of view of the vision assembly, and wherein capturing the at least one image frame before the time T, commences in response to the object tracking system detecting an object entering the field of view of the vision assembly (Holub [0051-0053] the camera captures a sequence of frames, and in the multiple frames showcases the movement of the object within the boundary of the checkout surface).
Claims 8, 16 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holub, Bonner and in further view of US 2013/0223673 A1 Davis et al. (hereinafter Davis).
Regarding claim 8, 16 and 20, Holub teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Holub fails to explicitly disclose wherein responsive to not being able to identify the at least one image frame captured before the time T, the apparatus provides a prompt to reposition the item on the weigh platter. Davis is in the field of retail checkouts (Davis Abstract, retail checkout system) and teaches wherein responsive to not being able to identify the at least one image frame captured before the time T, the apparatus provides a prompt to reposition the item on the weigh platter (Davis [0405] if the alert still remains red, it alerts the clerk to reposition items to be scanned). 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 identification of Holub with the alert to move as taught by Davis. The motivation for doing so would be to obtain a proper identification by having a clear visual of all items (Davis [0390] alert to determine proper identification).
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2018/0165733 A1 Kundu et al. teaches identification in retail environments (Abstract).
Conclusion
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