DETAILED ACTION
1. This office action is in response to the communication filed on 08/17/2026.
2. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
3. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
4. Applicant’s arguments filed on 08/17/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s argument: Obermann fails to disclose any receipt of "... an indication that the at least one function has been unlocked; and [causing] the point of sale device to present a third indication that the transaction is completed in response to receipt of the indication that the at least one function has been unlocked" as recited in claim 1.
Examiner’s response: The examiner directs applicant’s attention to see Obermann, fig. 1 and para. 63 where the point of sale includes a scanning device being integrated with an unlocking device, wherein the tool is unlocked by the unlocking device when the tool is scanned as part of the purchase process; see para. 81 where a receipt is printed to be provided to a user/purchaser at the point of sale. In other words, a receipt is printed as a third indication that the transaction is completed in response to receipt of the indication that the tool has been scanned and unlocked as part of the purchase process at the point of sale.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
5. Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Obermann et al. (US 2021/0122024 A1, hereafter Obermann).
Regarding claim(s) 1, 8, and 15:
Obermann discloses a system comprising: one or more processors; and one or more memories storing instructions that, upon execution by the one or more processors, (see figs. 1, 3, and 4) configure the system to:
receive a first indication of a transaction at a point of sale device for a sale or a rental of an electronic device when at least one function of the electronic device is in a locked state and can be unlocked based on unlocking information (see para. 63 where a tool is scanned (i.e., first indication) as part of a purchase process at a point of sale (i.e., point of sale device); see paras. 30, 32-33, 35 where a point of sale includes a processor and memory, wherein a tool is an electronic power tool (i.e., electronic device), and wherein the tool is locked to be prevented from operation (i.e., at least one function of the tool is in a locked state) and can be unlocked based on purchasing information (i.e., unlocking information));
authorize payment for the transaction; receive a second indication that the payment is received; cause the at least one function to be unlocked based on the unlocking information (see paras. 79-80, 90 where payment associated with the purchase of the tool is verified, wherein the point of sale transmits a confirmation (i.e., second indication) confirming a bona fide purchase with purchase information, and wherein the tool is unlocked based on purchasing information); and
receive an indication that the at least one function has been unlocked; cause the point of sale device to present a third indication that the transaction is completed in response to receipt of the indication that the at least one function being has been unlocked (see fig. 1 and para. 63 where the point of sale includes a scanning device being integrated with an unlocking device, wherein the tool is unlocked by the unlocking device when the tool is scanned as part of the purchase process; see para. 81 where a receipt is printed to be provided to a user/purchaser at the point of sale. In other words, a receipt is printed as a third indication that the transaction is completed in response to receipt of the indication that the tool has been scanned and unlocked as part of the purchase process at the point of sale).
Regarding claim(s) 2:
Obermann discloses:
an access device configured to selectively unlock the at least one function (see paras. 79-80 where an unlocking device, a remote server, or a cloud-based server (i.e., access device) is configured to generate an unlock code; see para. 90 where an unlock code is used to unlock a tool being locked; see para. 30 where a tool is locked to prevent its operations).
Regarding claim(s) 3:
Obermann discloses:
wherein the access device is communicatively coupled with a plurality of point of sale devices (see fig. 1 and paras. 31, 33-34 where a remote server or a cloud-based server is communicatively coupled with a plurality of retail stores, wherein each retail store includes at least a point of sale (e.g., cashier station. Note: in addition, it is very well-known that a retail store has multiple cashier stations).
Regarding claim(s) 4:
Obermann discloses:
wherein the point of sale device is configured to provide the first indication of the transaction, and determine, based on the first indication of the transaction, an identifier of the electronic device; send the identifier to the access device; and
receive, from the access device, a fourth indication that the identifier is received from the electronic device (see para. 63 where a tool is scanned (i.e., first indication) as part of a purchase process at a point of sale by a scanning device of the point of sale; see paras. 44, 66, 79-80 where a universal product code (UPC) is a scanning code (i.e., an identifier) of a tool, where the point of sale transmits purchase information including a UPC code of a tool to an unlocking device, a remote server or a cloud-based server, wherein an unlock code (i.e., fourth indication) is received, from an unlocking device, a remote server or a cloud-based server, wherein the unlock code is generated by the unlocking device, the remote server or the cloud-based server based on the purchase information).
Regarding claim(s) 5:
Obermann discloses:
wherein the first indication of the transaction comprises an extended universal product code (UPC), and wherein the unlocking information is based on the extended UPC (see paras. 44, 66, 79-80).
Regarding claim(s) 6, 13, and 18:
Obermann discloses:
send the unlocking information to the access device; and unlock the at least one function by at least sending the unlocking information from the access device to the electronic device (see paras. 79-80 where the point of sale transmits purchase information (i.e., unlocking information) to an unlocking device, a remote server or a cloud-based server, wherein an unlock code is generated based on the purchase information; see para. 82 where the unlock code is transmitted to the tool from the unlocking device, the remote server, or the cloud-based server; see para. 90 where an unlock code is used to unlock the tool).
Regarding claim(s) 7, 14, and 19:
Obermann discloses:
unlock the at least one function if the unlocking information corresponds to other unlocking information determined by the electronic device (see paras. 80, 89-90 where an unlock code is generated based on purchase information (i.e., unlocking information), wherein an electronic key provided upon purchasing the tool is used to transmit the unlock code to the tool, wherein the unlock code is used to unlock the tool after being verified/authenticated by the tool).
Regarding claim(s) 9 and 16:
Obermann discloses:
wherein the at least one function is selectively unlocked after receiving an activation request from an access device (see para. 82 where an unlocking device, a remote server or a cloud-based server transmits an unlock code (i.e. an activation request includes an unlock code) to the tool; see para. 90 where an unlock code is used to unlock/activate a tool being locked/deactivated; see para. 30 where a tool is locked/deactivated to prevent its operations).
Regarding claim(s) 10 and 17:
See the rejection to claim 4.
Regarding claim(s) 11, 12:
See the rejection to claim 5.
Regarding claim(s) 20:
Obermann discloses:
wherein the first indication of the transaction at the point of sale device is for the sale of the electronic device (see para. 63 where a tool is scanned (i.e., first indication) as part of a purchase process at a point of sale).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUAN V. DOAN whose telephone number is 571-272-3809. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday – Thursday, 9:00am – 5:00pm EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, PHILIP CHEA, can be reached on 571-272-3951. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/HUAN V DOAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2499
