DETAILED ACTION
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 § 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.
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) 1-3, 8, 10-11, 13, 16, 18, 20-21, and 24-27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cowell, US Pub. 2015/0179025.
Regarding claim 1, Cowell disclose a modular privacy booth for cooperative with teller station, ATM, or the like comprising: at least one booth 100, each booth of the at least one booth accessible from at least a customer side (fig. 6)100. (See figs. 1-2, and 6-7).
Cowell discloses that the at least one booth can be used in medical facilities, for example doctor's offices, hospital emergency room registration desks, pharmacies, or the like, personal information divulged by a client may be overheard. Also other situations such as general conversation with a teller/customer service rep. can lead to questions and or answers about a current or previous account disclosing sensitive information that could possibly lead to fraud and or Identification theft. When "you the customer/consumer" walk into a business such as a bank or hospital "you should feel safe and trustworthy of that facility disclosing sensitive and confidential information" Knowing that your transactions are strictly between the teller and the customer and not an unwanted third party. Cowell fails to disclose that the booth being used for pharmacy transactions and the pod or apparatus including at least one pharmacy transaction device. As well, Cowell does not disclose the details of the positioning and cooperation of the booth with other elements surrounding the pod or apparatus within a pharmaceutical environment (i.e. a floor plan showing bow the pod of apparatus could be placed within a pharmaceutical environment). Further, Cowell does not disclose the additional retail fixtures, shelves, racks, product-storage fixtures, pharmacy transaction device, payment device, pharmacy computer, air exchanger, lighting, wheelchair accessibility, sound insulation rating ranges (i.e. all the details that would make the pod or apparatus best adapted for use in a pharmaceutical environment). Finally, Cowell does not disclose the method of conducting at least one pham1acy transaction using the said pod or apparatus.
It would have been obvious to place the booth between a customer side and a dispensing side of a pharmacy counter, in order for pharmaceutical prescriptions and/or advices to be served and/or provided by the pharmacist or technician to the customer in a more private environment. Regarding the other features, namely the additional retail fixtures, shelves, racks, product-storage fixtures, pharmacy transaction device, payment device, pharmacy computer, air exchanger, lighting, wheelchair accessibility, sound insulation rating ranges, these are all considered to correspond to one or more straightforward possibilities or options which the skilled practitioner would select, without exercising inventive skill, to optimize the use of the pod or apparatus. Of note, these additional features each perform their own function and are unrelated to the pod or apparatus per se. As for the method of conducting at least one pharmacy transaction using the said pod or apparatus, this is not considered to add any inventiveness to the pod or apparatus as such pods and apparatuses were specifically made to conduct private activities within work or business environments. It is considered that it would have been obvious to a skilled practitioner to modify the pod or apparatus of Cowell to incorporate an additional transaction means, and further incorporate various other additional features, as herein discussed, to adapt it to a pharmaceutical environment and use it as a space for doing pharmaceutical related business.
Regarding claim 2, wherein one or more of the at least one booth is adjacent the pharmacy counter (in addition to the rejection of claim 1 above, see fig. 6).
Regarding claim 3, wherein one or more of the at least one booth is integrated into the pharmacy counter or attached to the pharmacy counter (see the rejection of claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 8, wherein the pharmacy counter comprises retail fixtures displaying or for displaying pharmacy products on the customer side of the pharmacy counter.
Regarding claim 10, wherein at least some of the retail fixtures are on opposite sides of one or more of the at least one booth (see the rejection of claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 11, wherein at least some of the retail fixtures are shelves (see the rejection of claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 13, wherein the pharmacy counter comprises product-storage fixtures for storing pharmacy products on the dispensing side of the pharmacy counter (see the rejection of claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 16, wherein at least some of the product-storage fixtures are shelves (see the rejection of claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 18, wherein each booth of the at least one booth is substantially enclosed on all sides (see fig. 1).
Regarding claim 20, further comprising the at least one pharmacy-transaction device (see the rejection of claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 21, wherein the at least one pharmacy-transaction device comprises at least one payment device (having the booth in a pharmacy environment, it would have been obvious to include a payment device for processing payments of products. Therefore, it would have been an obvious extension as taught by the prior art.
Regarding claim 24, wherein one or more of the at least one booth comprises at least one translucent exterior wall (with respect to the specific material, such limitation is just merely an engineering choice for meeting specific customer requirements, which therefore, obvious.
Regarding claim 25, wherein one or more of the at least one booth comprises at least one translucent exterior wall on each side of the booth (with respect to the specific material, such limitation is just merely an engineering choice for meeting specific customer requirements, which therefore, obvious.
Regarding claim 26, wherein the at least one translucent exterior wall permits visibility from within the one or more of the at least one booth to at least substantially all of a customer area on the customer side of the pharmacy counter (with respect to the specific material, such limitation is just merely an engineering choice for meeting specific customer requirements, which therefore, obvious.
Regarding claim 27, further comprising at least one air pump in communication with an interior of one or more of the at least one booth and with an exterior of the at least one booth, the at least one air pump operable to exchange air between the interior of the one or more of the at least one booth and the exterior of the at least one booth ( with respect to sound insulation rating ranges, these are all considered to correspond to one or more straightforward possibilities or options which a skilled practitioner would select, without exercising inventive skill, to optimize the use of the booth or apparatus. Of note, these additional features each perform their own function and are unrelated to the booth or apparatus per se. Therefore, it would have been obvious extension as taught by the prior art).
It noted that the claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Waskey US Patent No. 10,907370 and US Patent No. D286098 in the Internation search report.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Lamoncha, US Pub. 2025/0029700, discloses providing virtual pharmacy consultation.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL ST CYR whose telephone number is (571)272-2407. The examiner can normally be reached M to F 8:00-8:00.
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, Michael G Lee can be reached at 571-272-2398. 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.
DANIEL ST CYR
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2876
/DANIEL ST CYR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876