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 .
Priority
Application 18/998,709 was filed on January 27, 2025 and claims priority to Japanese Patent Application No. 2022-163770 filed on October 12, 2022.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on January 27, 2025 was filed before the mailing date of this non-final action. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 1- 9 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 is missing a colon after “wherein the charging-to-room processing unit includes”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 2 is missing a colon after “wherein the coupon use processing unit includes”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 3 is missing a colon after “the two-dimensional code assignment unit performs”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 4 is missing a colon after “the two-dimensional code assignment unit performs”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 5 is missing a colon after “the card key issuance unit performs”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 is missing a colon after “the card key issuance unit performs”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 is missing a colon after “the guest service system includes”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 8 is missing a colon after “the second guest service system includes”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 2-8 are also objected to by virtue of dependency on claim 1.
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 1-9 are 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.
Claims 1 and 9 recite, “a charging-to-room processing unit that performs a charging-to-room process for charging, through use of the two-dimensional code on the card key, payment of a price for a product purchased by the user, or payment of a fee for a service used by the user, to the room where the user stays” (emphasis added). The claims previously recite, “a two-dimensional code assignment unit that assigns the card key a two-dimensional code” (emphasis added). However, “assigning” a code to a card key is not the same as having the code “on” the card key. For example, it is unclear whether the code must be physically located on the card or merely have a code associated with it. For the purposes of examination, the claims are interpreted to mean that a two-dimensional code, used for charging, is physically located on the card. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 2-6 reference “the accommodation reservation number”. However, the phrasing for the references varies. For example, claim 2 recites “the accommodation reservation number” in lines 1-2 of the claim and claim 3 recites “the accommodation reservation number of the user from the accommodation reservation management system” in lines 8-10 of the claim. Claim 1, upon which the claims depend, recites, “the accommodation reservation number coded in the two-dimensional code”, but this phrasing is not consistently used. While it appears that the intent of the claims is that there is only one instance of an accommodation reservation number, the use of different phrases to modify the accommodation reservation number creates ambiguity as to whether or not there are multiple accommodation reservation numbers as well as when the number(s) are “coded in the two-dimensional code”. For the purposes of examination, the claims are interpreted to mean that a single accommodation reservation number is coded on the key card. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 2-8 are also rejected by virtue of dependency on claim 1.
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 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a non-statutory subject matter (i.e., software per se).
The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because: Claim 1 recites a series of units (i.e., a card key issuance unit, a two-dimensional code assignment unit, and a charging-to-room processing unit) and sections (i.e., a charging-to-room request reception section, an amount-of-money input request section, an amount-of-money information reception section, a room number input request section, a room number reception section, a charging-to-room permission determination section, and a charging-to-room permission section) configured to perform the various functions of the invention. However, the specification does not define the structure of a “unit” or “section” or otherwise set forth what constitutes statutory subject-matter for a “unit” or “section”. As such, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, a “unit” or “section” can include software per se, which is not an eligible category of subject matter (see MPEP 2106.03 “Products that do not have a physical or tangible form, such as information (often referred to as "data per se") or a computer program per se (often referred to as "software per se") when claimed as a product without any structural recitations”).
Claims 2-8 are rejected by virtue of dependency on claim 1.
Claims 1-9 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.
Independent Claims
MPEP 2106 Step 1:
Claim 9 is drawn to method (i.e., a process). As such, claim 9 is drawn to one of the statutory categories of invention. While claims 1-8 are rejected above for reciting non-statutory subject matter, the claims will be interpreted as reciting an item of manufacture for subject matter eligibility purposes in the analysis below. Specifically, the “charging-to-room system” is interpreted to mean a computer system and the various units and systems are interpreted to mean logical/functional blocks within the system.
MPEP 2106 Step 2A- Prong 1:
Independent claim 1 and 9 recite, issues a card key to a room of an accommodation facility where a user stays, based on accommodation plan information on the user acquired from an accommodation reservation management system;
assigns the card key a two-dimensional code in which identification information on the accommodation facility and an accommodation reservation number included in the accommodation plan information are coded;
and performs a charging-to-room process for charging, through use of the two-dimensional code, payment of a price for a product purchased by the user, or payment of a fee for a service used by the user, to the room where the user stays,
when a shop that sells the product or a shop that provides the service is in a charging- to-room mode, and when the two-dimensional code is scanned with the shop terminal, receives a charging-to-room request from the shop, the charging-to-room request including the identification information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number coded in the two-dimensional code,
sends, to the shop as a response to the charging-to-room request, an amount-of-money input request requesting that an amount of money corresponding to the price for the product or the fee for the service be inputted,
receives from the shop, as a response to the amount-of-money input request, amount-of-money information on the price for the product or the fee for the service inputted by staff of the shop,
sends to the shop a room number input request requesting that a room number of the room where the user stays be inputted,
receives from the shop, as a response to the room number input, the room number of the room where the user stays inputted by the user,
determines whether or not charging to the room where the user stays is possible, by checking the room number received from the shop against a room number of the user acquired from the accommodation reservation based on the identification information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number coded in the two- dimensional code,
and, when it is determined that charging to the room is possible, permits the price for the product purchased by the user or the fee for the service used by the user to be charged to the room where the user stays.
The limitations above are processes that under broadest reasonable interpretation cover “certain methods of organizing human activity” (including sales activities or behaviors, or business relations). Specifically, enabling sales transactions at a chop to be charged to a room is establishing business relationships and performing sales activities.
Additionally, the limitations include mental processes (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, or opinion) because they can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using pen and paper. Specifically, claims to request a price or fee for a product or service and verify a room number before charging said price or fee can all be practically performed in the human mind, or by a human using pen and paper.
MPEP 2106 Step 2A- Prong 2:
The judicial exceptions are not integrated into a practical application. Claims 1 and 9 as a whole amount to: merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, or “apply it”; or generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use.
Independent claims 1 and 9 recite the following additional elements to perform the above recited steps: a charging-to-room system and a shop terminal. These additional elements are generic computer components performing generic computer functions at a high level of generality, and are recited at a high level of generality. As such, the additional elements amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component.
Furthermore, claims 1 and 9 recite the additional element of a two-dimensional code on a card key. This additional element is described at high level of generality such that, when viewed as a whole, the additional element does no more than generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (i.e., encoding information on card keys).
Individually and as a whole, these additional elements do not integrate the judicial exceptions into a practical application because the claims do not: improve the functioning of the computer itself or any other technology or technical field; apply the judicial exception with, or by use of, a particular machine; effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing; add meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment to transform the judicial exception into patent-eligible subject matter; amount to more than a recitation of the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) or are more than mere instructions to implement an abstract idea or other exception on a computer.
MPEP 2106 Step 2B:
Independent claims 1 and 9 do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more (also known as an “inventive concept”) than the judicial exception. As discussed above, the additional elements are generic computer components performing generic computer functions at a high level of generality and/or generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. Alone or in combination, the additional elements do not contribute significantly more than the judicial exception and as a result, the claims are ineligible.
Dependent Claims
MPEP 2106 Step 1:
While claims 2-8 are rejected above for reciting non-statutory subject matter, the claims will be interpreted as reciting an item of manufacture for subject matter eligibility purposes in the analysis below. Particularly, the “charging-to-room system” is interpreted to mean a computer system and the various units and systems are interpreted to mean logical/functional blocks within the system. Similarly, the additional “systems” in dependent claims 2-8 are interpreted to mean computer systems.
MPEP 2106 Step 2A- Prong 2:
Dependent claims 2-8, recite additional details that merely narrow the previously recited abstract idea. Claims 2-8 also recite the additional elements of a coupon management system (claim 2), a guest service system (claims 3-7), an accommodation facility terminal (claim 3), a user terminal (claims 7 and 8), and a second guest service system (claim 8). Each of these additional elements are recited at a high level of generality such that when viewed as a whole, the additional elements amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (see MPEP 2106.05(f)).
MPEP 2106 Step 2B:
With respect to claims 2-8, as discussed above with respect to Step 2A Prong Two, the additional element amounts to no more than: a recitation of the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) or are more than mere instructions to implement an abstract idea or other exception on a computer. The same analysis applies here in Step 2B, i.e., applying the exception using a generic computer component, does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application at Step 2A or provide an inventive concept at Step 2B.
Therefore, the additional elements of a coupon management system, a guest service system, an accommodation facility terminal, a user terminal, and a second guest service system, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application at Step 2A or provide an inventive concept at Step 2B. Thus, even when viewed as a whole, nothing in the claim adds significantly more (i.e., an inventive concept) to the abstract idea. Thus, claims 2-8 are also ineligible.
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.
Claims 1, 2, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2011/0276520 to Levi (Levi) in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2014/0081677 to Craig et al. (Craig) in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2013/0248591 to Look et al. (Look).
As to claims 1 and 9, Levi teaches, a card key issuance unit that issues a card key to a room of an accommodation facility where a user stays, based on accommodation plan information on the user acquired from an accommodation reservation management system (“… A further embodiment of the present method simply includes providing a keycard and the hotel issuing the keycard to the hotel guest typically at check-in …” and “… The method illustrated in FIG. 1 further includes the imprinting of guest information onto the keycard 4 …” [0010-0013 and 0022-0023]);
a (“The method illustrated in FIG. 1 further includes the imprinting of guest information onto the keycard 4 …” and “… For example, as shown in FIG. 3, the card 16 also includes a bar code 22 …” [0023 and 0032]);
and a charging-to-room processing unit that performs a charging-to-room process for charging, through use of the where the user stays (“FIG. 1 is an overview flow diagram of the present method and system illustrating the charging of goods and services to a hotel room by entities associated with the keycard” and “… The provided hotel keycard can purchase goods and services at a discounted price at an offsite businesses with charges billed to the guest's room …” [0016 and 0019-0021]),
wherein the charging-to-room processing unit includes a charging-to-room request reception section that, when a shop terminal installed in a shop that sells the product or a shop that provides the service is set in a charging- to-room mode (“… The keycard accesses offsite attractions and transacts with cooperating offsite entities. Purchases made using the keycard can be charged to a guest's hotel room” and “… The keycard is designed to work with most any point of sale (POS) terminal to process such a transaction as shown in the step of reading the imprinted guest information 12 …” and “As illustrated in FIG. 2, the keycard 16 may serve as a reloadable debit card or stored value card wherein a monetary amount may be placed on the card by the hotel for the guest …” [0019-0020 and 0024-0025 and 0028-0030]),
and when the (“… The keycard is designed to work with most any point of sale (POS) terminal to process such a transaction as shown in the step of reading the imprinted guest information 12 …” and “… For example, as shown in FIG. 3, the card 16 also includes a bar code 22 …” and “further including the entity reading the guest's identifying information on the keycard and billing the hotel for the goods or services provided to the guest” [0024-0025 and 0032 and claim 3]),
the charging-to-room request including the [information] (“… The keycard is designed to work with most any point of sale (POS) terminal to process such a transaction as shown in the step of reading the imprinted guest information 12 …” [0023-0025]),
an amount-of-money input request section that sends, to the shop terminal as a response to the charging-to-room request, an amount-of-money input request requesting that an amount of money corresponding to the price for the product or the fee for the service be inputted (“… The provided hotel keycard can purchase goods and services at a discounted price at an offsite businesses with charges billed to the guest's room …” and “… The use of the keycard provides a convenience in that the card can be used to charge goods and services received from the entities directly to the guest's room at the hotel 14 as in the last step of the figure …” [0019-0020 and 0024-0025]),
an amount-of-money information reception section that receives from the shop terminal, as a response to the amount-of-money input request, amount-of-money information on the price for the product or the fee for the service inputted by staff of the shop through use of the shop terminal (“… The provided hotel keycard can purchase goods and services at a discounted price at an offsite businesses with charges billed to the guest's room …” and “… The use of the keycard provides a convenience in that the card can be used to charge goods and services received from the entities directly to the guest's room at the hotel 14 as in the last step of the figure …” [0019-0020 and 0024-0025]),
and a charging-to-room permission section that, when it is determined that charging to the room is possible, permits the price for the product purchased by the user or the fee for the service used by the user to be charged to the room where the user stays (“… The provided hotel keycard can purchase goods and services at a discounted price at an offsite businesses with charges billed to the guest's room …” and “… The use of the keycard provides a convenience in that the card can be used to charge goods and services received from the entities directly to the guest's room at the hotel 14 as in the last step of the figure …” and “Payment verification for the debit card can be accomplished using such transactional networks as Visa, MasterCard, Amex, ATM or a proprietary system …” [0019-0020 and 0024-0025 and 0030]).
Levi does not teach, a room number input request section that sends to the shop terminal a room number input request requesting that a room number of the room where the user stays be inputted, a room number reception section that receives from the shop terminal, as a response to the room number input, the room number of the room where the user stays inputted by the user through use of the shop terminal, a charging-to-room permission determination section that determines whether or not charging to the room where the user stays is possible, by checking the room number received from the shop terminal against a room number of the user acquired from the accommodation reservation management system based on the identification information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number coded in the two- dimensional code. However, Craig teaches, a room number input request section that sends to the shop terminal a room number input request requesting that a room number of the room where the user stays be inputted (“… Transaction software 40 may request entry of verification information, such as entry of the room number using touch screen 42 …” and “If the customer selects the room key option, transaction software 40 displays instructions to insert or swipe a room key in card reader 46 and obtains room key information from the customer via card reader 46 …” [0033 and 0053-0061]),
a room number reception section that receives from the shop terminal, as a response to the room number input, the room number of the room where the user stays inputted by the user through use of the shop terminal (“… Transaction software 40 may request entry of verification information, such as entry of the room number using touch screen 42 …” and “If the customer selects the room key option, transaction software 40 displays instructions to insert or swipe a room key in card reader 46 and obtains room key information from the customer via card reader 46 …” [0033 and 0053-0061]),
a charging-to-room permission determination section that determines whether or not charging to the room where the user stays is possible, by checking the room number received from the shop terminal against a room number of the user acquired from the accommodation reservation management system based on the [information] (“… Transaction software 40 may request entry of verification information, such as entry of the room number using touch screen 42 …” and “… For example, if the verification information is a room number, transaction software 40 compares the room number determined in step 80 to a customer entered room number to verify that the customer is the guest of record for the room determined in step 80 …” [0033 and 0053-0061]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filling date of the invention to include, a room number input request section that sends to the shop terminal a room number input request requesting that a room number of the room where the user stays be inputted, a room number reception section that receives from the shop terminal, as a response to the room number input, the room number of the room where the user stays inputted by the user through use of the shop terminal, a charging-to-room permission determination section that determines whether or not charging to the room where the user stays is possible, by checking the room number received from the shop terminal against a room number of the user acquired from the accommodation reservation management system based on the [information]
While Levi in view of Craig teaches a code, Levi in view of Craig does not teach a two-dimensional code. However, Look teaches, a two-dimensional code (“FIG. 10 is a schematic illustration of yet another transactional combined card of the present invention as is usable for electronic reading by two-dimension bar-code readers of different types as may also read and compare biometric information of a user with data stored within the two dimensional bar code, which code can include multiple uses for events in combination with a magnetic strip for electronic reading” [0030]). Since each individual element and its function are shown in the art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself—that is in the substitution of the two-dimensional code of Look for the code of Levi in view of Craig. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious. Motivation to do so comes from the teachings of Look that doing so would reduce the potential for fraud and theft based upon improper card usage [0004].
While Levi in view of Craig teaches information, Levi in view of Craig does not teach that the information includes information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number. However, Look teaches, the identification information includes information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number (“… To use track 3 as a key card in accordance with the present invention, such as for unlocking a hotel room door, track 3 could be encoded with the guest's reservation number …” [0084 and Fig 2 (showing “Montgomery Hotel” on a card)]). Since each individual element and its function are shown in the art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself—that is in the substitution of the information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number of Look for the information of Levi in view of Craig. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious. Motivation to do so comes from the teachings of Look that doing so would reduce the potential for fraud and theft based upon improper card usage [0004].
As to claim 2, Levi in view of Craig and in further view of Look teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. Levi further teaches, wherein the [information] (“… The method includes promoting a discount network card through a hotel keycard by incentivizing the hotel guest with promotional opportunities outside of the hotel grounds by the simple use of the hotel keycard …” and “The method further includes the step of associating the keycard with discount and incentives provided by entities 8 …” [0019-0020 and 0024]),
the charging-to-room system further comprising a coupon use processing unit that performs a coupon use process for allowing the user to use the coupon through use of the (“… Various entities may be identified in the method willing to associate with the keycard by providing goods and services at a discount. For example, the entity may be a store or tourist destination providing discounts to entice the hotel's guests to shop the store or visit a tourist destination …” and “… For example, as shown in FIG. 3, the card 16 also includes a bar code 22 …” [0024 and 0032]),
wherein the coupon use processing unit includes a coupon use request reception section that, when a shop terminal installed in a shop where the user desires to use the coupon is set in a coupon use mode (“… Purchases made using the keycard can be charged to a guest's hotel room. By using the hotel keycard a hotel guest can take advantage of prearranged discounts by simply presenting the keycard” and “… The debit keycard continues to provide discount and incentives at entities participating in the program …” [0019-0020 and 0029]),
and when the (“The entity can read the guest's identifying information on the keycard, typically such is stored on a magnetic strip to confirm the guest's eligibility to the discounts and incentives …” and “… The keycard is designed to work with most any point of sale (POS) terminal to process such a transaction as shown in the step of reading the imprinted guest information 12 …” [0011 and 0024-0025]),
a coupon use permission determination section that determines whether or not it is possible to use the coupon of the user at the shop, by referencing the coupon management system based on the [information] (“The entity can read the guest's identifying information on the keycard, typically such is stored on a magnetic strip to confirm the guest's eligibility to the discounts and incentives …” and “The method further includes the step of associating the keycard with discount and incentives provided by entities 8. Various entities may be identified in the method willing to associate with the keycard by providing goods and services at a discount…” [0011 and 0024-0025]),
and a determination result notification section that notifies the shop terminal, as a response to the coupon use request, of a result of the determination of whether or not it is possible to use the coupon of the user at the shop (“The entity can read the guest's identifying information on the keycard, typically such is stored on a magnetic strip to confirm the guest's eligibility to the discounts and incentives …” and “… The provided hotel keycard can purchase goods and services at a discounted price at an offsite businesses with charges billed to the guest's room” [0011 and 0019] Examiner notes that the completion of a purchase after confirming a discounted price is a determination result notification).
While Levi in view of Craig teaches a code, Levi in view of Craig does not teach a two-dimensional code. However, Look teaches, a two-dimensional code (“FIG. 10 is a schematic illustration of yet another transactional combined card of the present invention as is usable for electronic reading by two-dimension bar-code readers of different types as may also read and compare biometric information of a user with data stored within the two dimensional bar code, which code can include multiple uses for events in combination with a magnetic strip for electronic reading” [0030]). Since each individual element and its function are shown in the art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself—that is in the substitution of the two-dimensional code of Look for the code of Levi in view of Craig. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious. Motivation to do so comes from the teachings of Look that doing so would reduce the potential for fraud and theft based upon improper card usage [0004].
While Levi in view of Craig teaches information, Levi in view of Craig does not teach that the information includes information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number. However, Look teaches, the identification information includes information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number (“… To use track 3 as a key card in accordance with the present invention, such as for unlocking a hotel room door, track 3 could be encoded with the guest's reservation number …” [0084 and Fig 2 (showing “Montgomery Hotel” on a card)]). Since each individual element and its function are shown in the art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself—that is in the substitution of the information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number of Look for the information of Levi in view of Craig. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious. Motivation to do so comes from the teachings of Look that doing so would reduce the potential for fraud and theft based upon improper card usage [0004].
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2011/0276520 to Levi (Levi) in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2014/0081677 to Craig et al. (Craig) in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2013/0248591 to Look et al. (Look), as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2002/0120478 to Tanaka (Tanaka).
As to claim 3, Levi in view of Craig and in further view of Look teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. Levi further teaches, wherein access information for the user to access a guest service system is coded in the (“… The identifying information found on the keycard provides the proper processing information for the transaction which can be confirmed using a typical point of sale terminal” and “The method illustrated in FIG. 1 further includes the imprinting of guest information onto the keycard 4 …” [0010-0011 and 0023]),
and a process of assigning the [information] (“A further embodiment of the present method simply includes providing a keycard and the hotel issuing the keycard to the hotel guest typically at check-in …” and “… The method illustrated in FIG. 1 further includes the imprinting of guest information onto the keycard 4 …” [0013 and 0022-0023]).
Levi in view of Craig and in further view of Look does not teach, and the two-dimensional code assignment unit performs when staff of the accommodation facility inputs the room number of the user through use of an accommodation facility terminal installed in the accommodation facility, a process of acquiring the identification information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number of the user from the accommodation reservation management system, a process of acquiring the access information for the user from the guest service system, based on the identification information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number acquired from the accommodation reservation management system. However, Tanaka teaches, and the (“… When the guest 10 visits a facility of the hotel, a person in charge of the account inputs the room number of the guest 10 to the seat management apparatus 2 with the room number input means 21 for obtaining the room number from the card-key brought by the guest 10 or manually …” and “… In the case in which a visitor is a guest 10, a person in charge of the facility receives the card-key of the hotel from the guest 10, and then the room number of the guest 10 is read from the card-key through the card reader (not shown) of the seat management apparatus 2 of the facility, or is input to the seat management apparatus 2 manually (step S12), so that the guest is inquired of the lodging management system 1 of the hotel and thereby the information about the guest such as the room number, name, age, sex, etc. is obtained and indicated on the screen (steps S13 and S15) …” [0033 and 0035]),
a process of acquiring the access information for the user from the guest service system, based on the [information] (“… When the guest 10 visits a facility of the hotel, a person in charge of the account inputs the room number of the guest 10 to the seat management apparatus 2 with the room number input means 21 for obtaining the room number from the card-key brought by the guest 10 or manually …” and “… In the case in which a visitor is a guest 10, a person in charge of the facility receives the card-key of the hotel from the guest 10, and then the room number of the guest 10 is read from the card-key through the card reader (not shown) of the seat management apparatus 2 of the facility, or is input to the seat management apparatus 2 manually (step S12), so that the guest is inquired of the lodging management system 1 of the hotel and thereby the information about the guest such as the room number, name, age, sex, etc. is obtained and indicated on the screen (steps S13 and S15) …” [0033 and 0035]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filling date of the invention to include, and the
While Levi and Tanaka teach a code, Levi and Tanaka do not teach a two-dimensional code. However, Look teaches, a two-dimensional code (“FIG. 10 is a schematic illustration of yet another transactional combined card of the present invention as is usable for electronic reading by two-dimension bar-code readers of different types as may also read and compare biometric information of a user with data stored within the two dimensional bar code, which code can include multiple uses for events in combination with a magnetic strip for electronic reading” [0030]). Since each individual element and its function are shown in the art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself—that is in the substitution of the two-dimensional code of Look for the codes of Levi and Tanaka. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious. Motivation to do so comes from the teachings of Look that doing so would reduce the potential for fraud and theft based upon improper card usage [0004].
While Levi and Tanaka teach information, Levi and Tanaka do not teach that the information includes information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number. However, Look teaches, the identification information includes information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number (“… To use track 3 as a key card in accordance with the present invention, such as for unlocking a hotel room door, track 3 could be encoded with the guest's reservation number …” [0084 and Fig 2 (showing “Montgomery Hotel” on a card)]). Since each individual element and its function are shown in the art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself—that is in the substitution of the information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number of Look for the information of Levi and Tanaka. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious. Motivation to do so comes from the teachings of Look that doing so would reduce the potential for fraud and theft based upon improper card usage [0004].
Claims 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2011/0276520 to Levi (Levi) in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2014/0081677 to Craig et al. (Craig) in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2013/0248591 to Look et al. (Look), as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2013/0059603 to Guenec et al. (Guenec).
As to claim 4, Levi in view of Craig and in further view of Look teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. Levi further teaches, wherein access information for the user to access a guest service system is coded in the (“… The identifying information found on the keycard provides the proper processing information for the transaction which can be confirmed using a typical point of sale terminal” and “The method illustrated in FIG. 1 further includes the imprinting of guest information onto the keycard 4 …” [0010-0011 and 0023]),
and a process of assigning the [information] (“A further embodiment of the present method simply includes providing a keycard and the hotel issuing the keycard to the hotel guest typically at check-in …” and “… The method illustrated in FIG. 1 further includes the imprinting of guest information onto the keycard 4 …” [0013 and 0022-0023]).
While Levi teaches a code, Levi does not teach a two-dimensional code. However, Look teaches, a two-dimensional code (“FIG. 10 is a schematic illustration of yet another transactional combined card of the present invention as is usable for electronic reading by two-dimension bar-code readers of different types as may also read and compare biometric information of a user with data stored within the two dimensional bar code, which code can include multiple uses for events in combination with a magnetic strip for electronic reading” [0030]). Since each individual element and its function are shown in the art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself—that is in the substitution of the two-dimensional code of Look for the code of Levi. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious. Motivation to do so comes from the teachings of Look that doing so would reduce the potential for fraud and theft based upon improper card usage [0004].
While Levi teaches information, Levi does not teach that the information includes information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number. However, Look teaches, the identification information includes information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number (“… To use track 3 as a key card in accordance with the present invention, such as for unlocking a hotel room door, track 3 could be encoded with the guest's reservation number …” [0084 and Fig 2 (showing “Montgomery Hotel” on a card)]). Since each individual element and its function are shown in the art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself—that is in the substitution of the information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number of Look for the information of Levi. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious. Motivation to do so comes from the teachings of Look that doing so would reduce the potential for fraud and theft based upon improper card usage [0004].
Levi in view of Craig and in further view of Look does not teach, and the two-dimensional code assignment unit performs a process of acquiring the identification information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number included in the accommodation plan information from the accommodation reservation management system, a process of acquiring the access information for the user from the guest service system, based on the identification information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number included in the accommodation plan information. However, Guenec teaches, and the two-dimensional code assignment unit performs a process of acquiring the identification information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number included in the accommodation plan information from the accommodation reservation management system (“Referring now to FIG. 3, the online check-in process will now be described. The user requests online check-in at step 300 and the smart phone generates a message at step 302 which is sent to the central reservation system …” and “… The guest ID is identified in step 530 and the online check-in request including the guest ID and the reservation number is sent to the PMS step 532 …” [0042-0044 and 0047-0048]),
a process of acquiring the access information for the user from the guest service system, based on the identification information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number included in the accommodation plan information (“… Once the smart phone has read and decoded the QR code, the smart phone will then interface with the central reservation system to effect entry to the room …” and “… From the decoded QR code the smart phone sends a room opening request in step 556 to the central reservation system. The room opening request includes the guest credentials, the reservation number and the scanned hotel name and hotel room number from the QR code …” [0042-0044 and 0047-0048]),
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filling date of the invention to include, and the two-dimensional code assignment unit performs a process of acquiring the identification information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number included in the accommodation plan information from the accommodation reservation management system, a process of acquiring the access information for the user from the guest service system, based on the identification information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number included in the accommodation plan information, as taught by Guenec with the room charging system of Levi in view of Craig and in further view of Look. Motivation to do so comes from the teachings of Guenec that doing so would add the convenience and ease of advanced technology to the processes and methodologies of gaining access to a hotel room or the like [0009].
As to claim 5, Levi in view of Craig and in further view of Look teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. Levi further teaches, wherein access information for the user to access a guest service system is coded in the (“… The identifying information found on the keycard provides the proper processing information for the transaction which can be confirmed using a typical point of sale terminal” and “The method illustrated in FIG. 1 further includes the imprinting of guest information onto the keycard 4 …” [0010-0011 and 0023]),
the (“The system includes providing a keycard 2 to a hotel …” [0022-0023] Examiner notes that, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, “unified” is interpreted to include the case where both units are in a single system, as taught by Levi),
and a process of, when issuing the card key of the user based on the accommodation plan information on the user acquired from the accommodation reservation management system, assigning the [information] (“A further embodiment of the present method simply includes providing a keycard and the hotel issuing the keycard to the hotel guest typically at check-in …” and “… The method illustrated in FIG. 1 further includes the imprinting of guest information onto the keycard 4 …” [0013 and 0022-0023]).
While Levi teaches a code, Levi does not teach a two-dimensional code. However, Look teaches, a two-dimensional code (“FIG. 10 is a schematic illustration of yet another transactional combined card of the present invention as is usable for electronic reading by two-dimension bar-code readers of different types as may also read and compare biometric information of a user with data stored within the two dimensional bar code, which code can include multiple uses for events in combination with a magnetic strip for electronic reading” [0030]). Since each individual element and its function are shown in the art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself—that is in the substitution of the two-dimensional code of Look for the code of Levi. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious. Motivation to do so comes from the teachings of Look that doing so would reduce the potential for fraud and theft based upon improper card usage [0004].
While Levi teaches information, Levi does not teach that the information includes information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number. However, Look teaches, the identification information includes information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number (“… To use track 3 as a key card in accordance with the present invention, such as for unlocking a hotel room door, track 3 could be encoded with the guest's reservation number …” [0084 and Fig 2 (showing “Montgomery Hotel” on a card)]). Since each individual element and its function are shown in the art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself—that is in the substitution of the information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number of Look for the information of Levi. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious. Motivation to do so comes from the teachings of Look that doing so would reduce the potential for fraud and theft based upon improper card usage [0004].
Levi in view of Craig and in further view of Look does not teach, and the card key issuance unit performs a process of acquiring the identification information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number included in the accommodation plan information from the accommodation reservation management system, a process of acquiring the access information for the user from the guest service system, based on the identification information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number included in the accommodation plan information. However, Guenec teaches, and the card key issuance unit performs a process of acquiring the identification information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number included in the accommodation plan information from the accommodation reservation management system (“Referring now to FIG. 3, the online check-in process will now be described. The user requests online check-in at step 300 and the smart phone generates a message at step 302 which is sent to the central reservation system …” and “… The guest ID is identified in step 530 and the online check-in request including the guest ID and the reservation number is sent to the PMS step 532 …” [0042-0044 and 0047-0048]),
a process of acquiring the access information for the user from the guest service system, based on the identification information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number included in the accommodation plan information (“… Once the smart phone has read and decoded the QR code, the smart phone will then interface with the central reservation system to effect entry to the room …” and “… From the decoded QR code the smart phone sends a room opening request in step 556 to the central reservation system. The room opening request includes the guest credentials, the reservation number and the scanned hotel name and hotel room number from the QR code …” [0042-0044 and 0047-0048]),
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filling date of the invention to include, and the card key issuance unit performs a process of acquiring the identification information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number included in the accommodation plan information from the accommodation reservation management system, a process of acquiring the access information for the user from the guest service system, based on the identification information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number included in the accommodation plan information, as taught by Guenec with the room charging system of Levi in view of Craig and in further view of Look. Motivation to do so comes from the teachings of Guenec that doing so would add the convenience and ease of advanced technology to the processes and methodologies of gaining access to a hotel room or the like [0009].
As to claim 6, Levi in view of Craig and in further view of Look teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. Levi further teaches, wherein access information for the user to access a guest service system is coded in the (“… The identifying information found on the keycard provides the proper processing information for the transaction which can be confirmed using a typical point of sale terminal” and “The method illustrated in FIG. 1 further includes the imprinting of guest information onto the keycard 4 …” [0010-0011 and 0023]),
the (“The system includes providing a keycard 2 to a hotel …” [0022-0023]),
and a process of, when issuing the card key of the user, assigning the [information] (“A further embodiment of the present method simply includes providing a keycard and the hotel issuing the keycard to the hotel guest typically at check-in …” and “… The method illustrated in FIG. 1 further includes the imprinting of guest information onto the keycard 4 …” [0013 and 0022-0023]).
While Levi teaches a code, Levi does not teach a two-dimensional code. However, Look teaches, a two-dimensional code (“FIG. 10 is a schematic illustration of yet another transactional combined card of the present invention as is usable for electronic reading by two-dimension bar-code readers of different types as may also read and compare biometric information of a user with data stored within the two dimensional bar code, which code can include multiple uses for events in combination with a magnetic strip for electronic reading” [0030]). Since each individual element and its function are shown in the art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself—that is in the substitution of the two-dimensional code of Look for the code of Levi. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious. Motivation to do so comes from the teachings of Look that doing so would reduce the potential for fraud and theft based upon improper card usage [0004].
While Levi teaches information, Levi does not teach that the information includes information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number. However, Look teaches, the identification information includes information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number (“… To use track 3 as a key card in accordance with the present invention, such as for unlocking a hotel room door, track 3 could be encoded with the guest's reservation number …” [0084 and Fig 2 (showing “Montgomery Hotel” on a card)]). Since each individual element and its function are shown in the art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself—that is in the substitution of the information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number of Look for the information of Levi. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious. Motivation to do so comes from the teachings of Look that doing so would reduce the potential for fraud and theft based upon improper card usage [0004].
Levi in view of Craig and in further view of Look does not teach, a process of acquiring the identification information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number included in the accommodation plan information from the accommodation reservation management system. However, Guenec teaches, a process of acquiring the identification information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number included in the accommodation plan information from the accommodation reservation management system (“Referring now to FIG. 3, the online check-in process will now be described. The user requests online check-in at step 300 and the smart phone generates a message at step 302 which is sent to the central reservation system …” and “… The guest ID is identified in step 530 and the online check-in request including the guest ID and the reservation number is sent to the PMS step 532 …” [0042-0044 and 0047-0048]),
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filling date of the invention to include, a process of acquiring the identification information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number included in the accommodation plan information from the accommodation reservation management system, as taught by Guenec with the room charging system of Levi in view of Craig and in further view of Look. Motivation to do so comes from the teachings of Guenec that doing so would add the convenience and ease of advanced technology to the processes and methodologies of gaining access to a hotel room or the like [0009].
Claims 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2011/0276520 to Levi (Levi) in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2014/0081677 to Craig et al. (Craig) in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2013/0248591 to Look et al. (Look), as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2013/0059603 to Guenec et al. (Guenec) and in further view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2014/0081854 to Sanchez et al. (Sanchez).
As to claim 7, Levi in view of Craig and in further view of Look teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. Levi further teaches, wherein access information for the user to access a guest service system is coded in the (“… The identifying information found on the keycard provides the proper processing information for the transaction which can be confirmed using a typical point of sale terminal” and “The method illustrated in FIG. 1 further includes the imprinting of guest information onto the keycard 4 …” [0010-0011 and 0023]).
While Levi teaches a code, Levi does not teach a two-dimensional code. However, Look teaches, a two-dimensional code (“FIG. 10 is a schematic illustration of yet another transactional combined card of the present invention as is usable for electronic reading by two-dimension bar-code readers of different types as may also read and compare biometric information of a user with data stored within the two dimensional bar code, which code can include multiple uses for events in combination with a magnetic strip for electronic reading” [0030]). Since each individual element and its function are shown in the art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself—that is in the substitution of the two-dimensional code of Look for the code of Levi. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious. Motivation to do so comes from the teachings of Look that doing so would reduce the potential for fraud and theft based upon improper card usage [0004].
Levi in view of Craig and in further view of Look does not teach, and the guest service system includes a user authentication section that, when the two-dimensional code is scanned with a user terminal owned by the user, accepts access from the user terminal based on the access information coded in the two-dimensional code, and performs an authentication process for the user based on the identification information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number coded in the two-dimensional code. However, Guenec teaches, and the guest service system includes a user authentication section that, when the two-dimensional code is scanned with a user terminal owned by the user, accepts access from the user terminal based on the access information coded in the two-dimensional code, and performs an authentication process for the user based on the identification information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number coded in the two-dimensional code (“… he PMS verifies that the guest ID reservation number, room number and hotel name all correspond with the correct booking and open or unlock the door of the hotel room remotely at step 410 …” and “… The PMS checks the reservation number against the guest ID in step 534 and the check-in day against the current day in step 536. The PMS then assigns the room number if the checks are both positive …” [0044 and 0047-0048]),
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filling date of the invention to include, and the guest service system includes a user authentication section that, when the two-dimensional code is scanned with a user terminal owned by the user, accepts access from the user terminal based on the access information coded in the two-dimensional code, and performs an authentication process for the user based on the identification information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number coded in the two-dimensional code, as taught by Guenec with the room charging system of Levi in view of Craig and in further view of Look. Motivation to do so comes from the teachings of Guenec that doing so would add the convenience and ease of advanced technology to the processes and methodologies of gaining access to a hotel room or the like [0009].
Levi in view of Craig in further view of Look and in further view of Guenec does not teach, a second two-dimensional code in which identification information on the shop is coded is provided in the shop, a scan request section that, when the authentication process for the user succeeds, sends to the user terminal a scan request that causes the second two-dimensional code in the shop to be scanned, a guest service permission determination section that, when the second two- dimensional code is scanned with the user terminal, determines, based on the identification information on the shop coded in the second two-dimensional code, whether or not it is possible to charge payment of the price for the product purchased by the user at the shop, or payment of the fee for the service used by the user at the shop, to the room where the user stays, or whether or not it is possible to use a coupon at the shop, and a determination result notification section that notifies a result of the determination by the guest service permission determination section to the user terminal. However, Sanchez teaches, a second two-dimensional code in which identification information on the shop is coded is provided in the shop (“… The merchant location 136 may include a code 138, such as a QR code, bar code, or other machine readable code, wherein consumers can utilize a respective consumer or mobile device 120(1)-120(N) to scan or read the code to obtain information associated with a merchant, such as a product pricing information” [0046]),
a scan request section that, when the authentication process for the user succeeds, sends to the user terminal a scan request that causes the second two-dimensional code in the shop to be scanned (“The present disclosure relates to systems and methods providing an on-site purchaser with the ability to obtain remote authorization and payment of goods at a merchant location by an off-site third-party payor via mobile commerce …” and “… In block 410, the worker can use his mobile device 120 to scan a code on one or more products that the worker intends to select for purchase. In one example embodiment, the code is a bar code, a QR code, or any other one-dimensional or two dimensional code and is scanned using the camera, bar code reader, or QR code reader incorporated into the on-site consumer mobile device 120 …” [0034-0036 and 0073-0079]),
a guest service permission determination section that, when the second two- dimensional code is scanned with the user terminal, determines, based on the identification information on the shop coded in the second two-dimensional code, whether or not it is possible to charge payment of the price for the product purchased by the user at the shop, or payment of the fee for the service used by the user at the shop, to the room where the user stays, or whether or not it is possible to use a coupon at the shop (“… The merchant may enter or scan the payment code at the merchant POS device to access the third-party payor's payment instructions and selected payment method and may use the selected payment method for payment of the goods and/or services selected by the on-site consumer” and “… In addition, an example of the user interface showing one of the example payment codes, in this case a QR code, is provided in FIG. 15. In block 490, the payment code is scanned by the merchant POS device 112 (e.g., a bar code or QR code scanner) to determine the payment instructions and/or selected payment method” [0034-0036 and 0073-0079]),
and a determination result notification section that notifies a result of the determination by the guest service permission determination section to the user terminal (“… One example of the display on the user interface of the on-site consumer's mobile device 120 for a notification of approval or decline by the third-party payor is provided in FIGS. 14 and 15 …” [0073-0079]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filling date of the invention to include, a second two-dimensional code in which identification information on the shop is coded is provided in the shop, a scan request section that, when the authentication process for the user succeeds, sends to the user terminal a scan request that causes the second two-dimensional code in the shop to be scanned, a guest service permission determination section that, when the second two- dimensional code is scanned with the user terminal, determines, based on the identification information on the shop coded in the second two-dimensional code, whether or not it is possible to charge payment of the price for the product purchased by the user at the shop, or payment of the fee for the service used by the user at the shop, to the room where the user stays, or whether or not it is possible to use a coupon at the shop, and a determination result notification section that notifies a result of the determination by the guest service permission determination section to the user terminal, as taught by Sanchez with the room charging system of Levi in view of Craig in further view of Look and in further view of Guenec. Motivation to do so comes from the teachings of Sanchez that doing so would facilitate remote authorization and payment of goods via mobile commerce [0005].
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2011/0276520 to Levi (Levi) in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2014/0081677 to Craig et al. (Craig) in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2013/0248591 to Look et al. (Look), as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2020/0342440 to Yamada et al. (Yamada).
As to claim 8, Levi in view of Craig and in further view of Look teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. Levi further teaches, a guest service permission determination section that, when the (“Turning now to the attached drawings, wherein like reference numerals will refer to like elements throughout, FIG. 1 represents an overview flow block diagram of the present method and system illustrating the charging of goods and services to a hotel room by entities associated with the keycard …” and “… Payment verification for the debit card can be accomplished using such transactional networks as Visa, MasterCard, Amex, ATM or a proprietary system …” [0021-0025 and 0028-0030]).
While Levi teaches a code, Levi does not teach a two-dimensional code. However, Look teaches, a two-dimensional code (“FIG. 10 is a schematic illustration of yet another transactional combined card of the present invention as is usable for electronic reading by two-dimension bar-code readers of different types as may also read and compare biometric information of a user with data stored within the two dimensional bar code, which code can include multiple uses for events in combination with a magnetic strip for electronic reading” [0030]). Since each individual element and its function are shown in the art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself—that is in the substitution of the two-dimensional code of Look for the code of Levi. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious. Motivation to do so comes from the teachings of Look that doing so would reduce the potential for fraud and theft based upon improper card usage [0004].
While Levi teaches information, Levi does not teach that the information includes information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number. However, Look teaches, the identification information includes information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number (“… To use track 3 as a key card in accordance with the present invention, such as for unlocking a hotel room door, track 3 could be encoded with the guest's reservation number …” [0084 and Fig 2 (showing “Montgomery Hotel” on a card)]). Since each individual element and its function are shown in the art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself—that is in the substitution of the information on the accommodation facility and the accommodation reservation number of Look for the information of Levi. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious. Motivation to do so comes from the teachings of Look that doing so would reduce the potential for fraud and theft based upon improper card usage [0004].
Levi in view of Craig and in further view of Look does not teach, wherein a second two-dimensional code in which identification information on the shop and second access information for the user to access a second guest service system are coded is provided in the shop, and the second guest service system includes a shop authentication section that, when the second two-dimensional code is scanned with a user terminal owned by the user, accepts access from the user terminal based on the second access information coded in the second two-dimensional code, and performs an authentication process for the shop based on the identification information on the shop coded in the second two-dimensional code, a scan request section that, when the authentication process for the shop succeeds, sends to the user terminal a scan request that causes the two-dimensional code on the card key of the user to be scanned, and a determination result notification section that notifies a result of the determination by the guest service permission determination section to the user terminal. However, Yamada teaches, wherein a second two-dimensional code in which identification information on the shop and second access information for the user to access a second guest service system are coded is provided in the shop (“… wherein the authentication information includes user information (user ID) included in the QR code and shop information (shop ID) …” and “In the configuration of Embodiment 2, for example, the QR code C1 includes a shop ID and information of a bill for a product, where the shop ID is authentication information corresponding to the shop terminal 1 …” [0035 and 0168-0172]),
and the second guest service system includes a shop authentication section that, when the second two-dimensional code is scanned with a user terminal owned by the user, accepts access from the user terminal based on the second access information coded in the second two-dimensional code, and performs an authentication process for the shop based on the identification information on the shop coded in the second two-dimensional code (“… When the two shop IDs match each other, and the user ID is included in the user ID list, the payment apparatus 3 transmits authentication result “authentication success” to the user terminal 2” [0168-0172]),
a scan request section that, when the authentication process for the shop succeeds, sends to the user terminal a scan request that causes the two-dimensional code (“… The authentication processing unit 313 executes the authentication process of the user …” and “According to the above-described embodiment (Embodiment 1), the shop terminal 1 (the information processing apparatus, the second terminal) reads the QR code C1 displayed on the user terminal 2 (the first terminal), and the shop terminal 1 transmits the authentication information (including the user ID) to a plurality of payment apparatuses 3 …” [0079-0081 and 0168-0172]),
and a determination result notification section that notifies a result of the determination by the guest service permission determination section to the user terminal (“… When the two shop IDs match each other, and the user ID is included in the user ID list, the payment apparatus 3 transmits authentication result “authentication success” to the user terminal 2” [0169]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filling date of the invention to include, wherein a second two-dimensional code in which identification information on the shop and second access information for the user to access a second guest service system are coded is provided in the shop, and the second guest service system includes a shop authentication section that, when the second two-dimensional code is scanned with a user terminal owned by the user, accepts access from the user terminal based on the second access information coded in the second two-dimensional code, and performs an authentication process for the shop based on the identification information on the shop coded in the second two-dimensional code, a scan request section that, when the authentication process for the shop succeeds, sends to the user terminal a scan request that causes the two-dimensional code on the card key of the user to be scanned, and a determination result notification section that notifies a result of the determination by the guest service permission determination section to the user terminal, as taught by Yamada with the room charging system of Levi in view of Craig and in further view of Look. Motivation to do so comes from the teachings of Yamada that doing so would improve a convenience of a user in an information code payment [00].
While Yamada teaches a code of the user Yamada does not teach that the code is on the card key of the user. However, Levi teaches, the code is on the card key of the user (“… For example, as shown in FIG. 3, the card 16 also includes a bar code 22. The card 16 of course may have most any combination of encodable medium located thereupon it for imprinting various desirable information to the keycard 16” [0032]). Since each individual element and its function are shown in the art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself—that is in the substitution of the code on the card key of Levi for the code of Yamada. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious. Motivation to do so comes from the teachings of Levi that doing so would entice a guest to stay at a hotel and provide incentives outside of the services typically offered by hotels [0008].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
U.S. Patent Publication No. 2023/0083785 to Maiman et al. (Maiman) teaches, keys for unlocking access to a location, like a user room, a secure location, a door at an employee location, a trunk, a closet or other locked location or item, on a payment card.
U.S. Patent Publication No. 2004/0139017 to Fujimoto et al. (Fujimoto) teaches, in a hotel installed with a casino, a house card stored with user information enabling identification of a user is issued, a casino deposit enabling the user to utilize casino services upon acquirement of the house card.
U.S. Patent No. 8,985,443 to Boyle (Boyle) teaches, a method and system for self-service access to a card key locked room of a facility is disclosed herein. A magnetic card key with a QRC is utilized with a mobile application resident on a mobile communication device to activate the card and allow for self-service access to check into a hotel.
U.S. Patent No. 6,604,085 to Kolls (Kolls) teaches, a universal advertising and payment system for networking, monitoring and controlling electronic commerce and vending equipment. The present invention allows a user to obtain authorization for use, pay for products and services, and configure the vending equipment with a smart card, or magnetic card (card). Magnetic cards include a hotel room key/card or other insertion type-identifying device.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHANIE S WALLICK whose telephone number is (703)756-1081. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10am-6pm.
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, Shannon Campbell can be reached at (571) 272-5587. 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.
/S.S.W./Examiner, Art Unit 3628
/SHANNON S CAMPBELL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3628