DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Claims
This office action is submitted in response to the application filed on 2/7/25.
Examiner notes that this application claims priority from provisional application 63564226.
Examiner further notes that this application is a continuation in part of 18/476772.
Examiner further notes that 18/476772 claims priority from four different provisional applications.
Examiner further notes Applicant’s priority date of 10/17/22, which stems from the aforementioned parent and/or provisional applications.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been examined.
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 .
Double Patenting
Claim 1-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1-12, 14-19, and 21-22 of copending Application No. 18/476772 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the inventions both describe a system comprising beacon transmitters to transmit wireless data; a processing system that includes a memory that stores operational instructions corresponding to an intelligent application and a processing circuit configured to execute the operational instructions, wherein the operational instructions cause the processing circuit to received data from a client device, and determining location data of users based on the beacon data.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Independent claim 1, in part, describes an invention comprising: (1) "generating, in response to beacon data, location data that indicates positions of the plurality of users in association with the structure"; and (2) "generating mapping data that tracks the positions of the plurality of users in association with the structure over time." As such, the invention is directed to the abstract idea of generating location data indicating the positions of users within a structure and tracking those positions over time to produce movement mapping data, which is aptly categorized as a method of organizing human activity (managing and monitoring the movements and interactions of users within a commercial structure) as well as a mental process (observing, correlating, and recording the positions and movements of individuals within a space). Therefore, under Step 2A, Prong One, the claims recite a judicial exception.
Next, the aforementioned claims recite additional elements that are associated with the judicial exception, including: "receiving beacon data from client devices associated with a corresponding plurality of users in response to the wireless beacons." Examiner understands these limitations to be insignificant extra-solution activity. (See Accenture, 728 F.3d 1336, 108 U.S.P.Q.2d 1173 (Fed. Cir. 2013), citing Cf. Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. 175, 191-192 (1981) ("[I]nsignificant post-solution activity will not transform an unpatentable principle into a patentable process.")).
The aforementioned claims also recite additional elements including: (1) a "plurality of beacon transmitters associated with a structure configured to transmit a plurality of wireless beacons" (claim 1); (2) a "memory that stores operational instructions corresponding to an intelligent structure application" (claim 1); and (3) a "processing circuit configured to execute the operational instructions" (claim 1). These limitations are recited at a high level of generality, and appear to be nothing more than field-of-use limitations (applying the abstract idea of generating user location data and tracking user movements to a structure outfitted with wireless beacons), with generic computer components (beacon transmitters, memory, and processing circuit) to automate the mental processes of deriving positional data and mapping user movements over time. Claims that amount to nothing more than an instruction to apply the abstract idea using a generic computer do not render an abstract idea eligible. Alice Corp., 134 S. Ct. at 2358, 110 USPQ2d at 1983.
Furthermore, looking at the elements individually and in combination, under Step 2A, Prong Two, the claims as a whole do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application because they fail to: improve the functioning of a computer or a technical field; apply the judicial exception with a particular machine; effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing; or apply the judicial exception beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment. Rather, the claims merely use generic beacon transmitters and generic computer components to receive proximity-based device signals, derive user location data, and generate movement mapping data for storage and tracking.
Additionally, pursuant to the requirement under Berkheimer, the following citations are provided to demonstrate that the additional elements amount to activities that are well-understood, routine, and conventional. See MPEP 2106.05(d).
Receiving or transmitting data. Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362; OIP Techs., Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014).
Thus, taken alone and in combination, the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the above-identified judicial exception (the abstract idea), and are ineligible under 35 USC 101.
Claims 2--20 are dependent on claim 1 and further limit the abstract idea with non-functional descriptive features as follows: accumulating mapping data to indicate traffic patterns of users inside, outside, or both inside and outside the structure (claim 2); generating dwell time data indicating average user dwell times at one or more locations associated with the structure (claim 3); specifying that the one or more locations include a pick-up location, order location, table position, bar position, gas pump, or vehicle recharging station (claim 4); receiving orders from client devices and fulfilling those orders based on a schedule derived from estimated times of arrival of users traveling to the structure (claim 5); determining estimated times of arrival based on user positions along travel routes and further basing the schedule on estimated preparation times of ordered items (claim 6); further basing the schedule on food quality at fulfillment, dwell time for pick-up or delivery, and kitchen staff operations (claim 7); sending proximity-based promotional data to client devices selected based on the user's position relative to a kiosk, product display, or mobile check-out location (claim 8); detecting a client device at a service location via an automated beacon reply signal, establishing an association between the device and a transaction, and facilitating payment via payment information stored on the device (claim 9); specifying that payment information is stored via an electronic wallet, that payment is facilitated automatically without user interaction, and that feedback includes an audible alert (claim 10); generating dwell time data for delivery vendors at a pick-up location (claim 11); receiving delivery orders, receiving travel time indications for delivery vendors, and fulfilling orders based on a schedule generated from vendor travel times (claim 12); determining estimated vendor arrival times based on vendor positions, updating an order queue as orders are prepared and fulfilled, and incorporating additional guest orders into the schedule (claim 13); specifying that orders are received from order delivery platforms and that vendor travel time indications are received from those platforms (claim 14); generating a schedule of order completion and communicating estimated completion times to each delivery vendor (claim 15); specifying that location data indicates a user's position relative to a shelf position within the structure and sending proximity-based promotional data based on that shelf position (claim 16); specifying that the shelf position corresponds to a product display and that promotional data is based on products associated with that display (claim 17); adding client device operations including generating a GUI via touchscreen, receiving beacon transmitter registration data, sending initial wireless configurations to beacon transmitters, performing calibration and operational validation of beacon transmitters, and transmitting wireless settings and registration data to the processing system (claim 18); capturing optical data from beacon transmitters that includes beacon identification data, generating a mapping of beacon identification to registration data, and transmitting that mapping to the processing system (claim 19); and specifying that beacon transmitter registration data indicates a mode of use corresponding to installation under a table and further indicates table positioning, composition, shape, or size (claim 20).
These claims merely specify particular implementation details or variations on the fundamental commercial practice of tracking user and vendor locations within a structure, managing order fulfillment based on arrival logistics, and delivering proximity-based promotions. They do not recite any additional functional computer operations beyond generic data collection, processing, and transmission, and do not affect an improvement in the functioning of the computer itself, in beacon or wireless network technology, or in any other technical field. The dependent claims merely add further detail to the abstract idea of location-based user tracking and structure management without providing significantly more than the underlying abstract idea.
Therefore, claims 1-20 are not drawn to eligible subject matter, as they are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
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.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon et al. (US 20230385963A1) in view of DeLuca (US 20190053005A1).
Claim 1: Kwon discloses a system comprising:
"a plurality of beacon transmitters associated with a structure configured to transmit a plurality of wireless beacons" (Paragraph 0043. Kwon discloses that the plurality of beacons installed at each of the plurality of restaurants include a first beacon located outside the restaurant, a second beacon located inside the restaurant, and a third beacon, which reads on a plurality of beacon transmitters associated with a structure configured to transmit a plurality of wireless beacons.);
"a processing system that includes a memory that stores operational instructions corresponding to an intelligent structure application and a processing circuit configured to execute the operational instructions" (Paragraph 0039. Kwon discloses an electronic device including a processor and a memory, wherein the memory stores information related to the method and a program implementing the method, and wherein the processor executes programs and controls the electronic device, which reads on a processing system that includes a memory that stores operational instructions and a processing circuit configured to execute the operational instructions.);
"wherein the operational instructions cause the processing circuit to perform operations that include: receiving beacon data from client devices associated with a corresponding plurality of users in response to the wireless beacons" (Paragraph 0041. Kwon discloses that the processor receives, from the user terminal, a plurality of beacon identification signals transmitted by a plurality of beacons, which reads on receiving beacon data from client devices associated with a corresponding plurality of users in response to the wireless beacons.); and
"generating, in response to the beacon data, location data that indicates positions of the plurality of users in association with the structure" (Paragraphs 0045, 0052. Kwon discloses that the processor extracts a first location of the user terminal based on the beacon identification signals and extracts the location of the user via trilateration based on three or more beacons, the installation locations of the beacons, and the values of the RSSI of the beacon identification signals, which reads on generating, in response to the beacon data, location data that indicates positions of the plurality of users in association with the structure.).
Kwon, however, does not appear to explicitly describe "generating mapping data that tracks the positions of the plurality of users in association with the structure over time."
DeLuca, however, discloses "generating mapping data that tracks the positions of the plurality of users in association with the structure over time" (Paragraph 0003. DeLuca discloses tracking, within a venue by a processor, zone events that represent relative movements and dwelling times of multiple mobile devices within the venue as users of the respective mobile devices move and dwell among and within multiple configured zones of the venue; Paragraph 0011. DeLuca further discloses that the technology tracks mobile devices as the respective users enter into venue zones, move within venue zones, stay/dwell at different locations within venue zones, and move between/among venue zones within a particular venue; Paragraph 0015. DeLuca further discloses that the present technology analyzes movements and dwelling patterns of mobile device users as they enter, exit, and remain within one or more venues to determine the respective users' movement patterns within the venues relative to other users; each of which reads on generating mapping data that tracks the positions of the plurality of users in association with the structure over time.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the invention to combine this feature of DeLuca with those of Kwon. One would have been motivated to do this in order to accumulate and analyze multi-user movement and position data over time within the beacon-equipped venue, thereby enabling operational insights such as traffic flow analysis, dwell pattern identification, and service optimization based on tracked user positions within the structure.
Claim 2: The Kwon/DeLuca combination discloses those limitations cited above.
Kwon, however, further discloses "wherein the mapping data is accumulated for the plurality of users and indicates at least one of: a traffic pattern of the users within the structure; a traffic pattern of the users outside the structure or a traffic patterns of the users within the structure and outside the structure" (Paragraphs 0056, 0057. Kwon discloses that the system explicitly tracks whether the user is inside or outside the restaurant based on beacon signal relationships, extracting an inside point of the restaurant as the first location when the representative beacon identification signals all relate to the same restaurant, and extracting an outside point of a restaurant when the representative beacon identification signals relate to two or more restaurants, which reads on mapping data that indicates a traffic pattern of the users within the structure and outside the structure; Paragraphs 0075, 0076, 0077, 0078, 0079, 0082, 0083. Kwon further discloses tracking user movement vectors, timing, and location transitions between inside and outside the restaurant, including calculating vector distances and thinking times as users move from outside points to inside points of the restaurant and from outside points to outside points of other restaurants, which reads on mapping data accumulated for the plurality of users indicating traffic patterns of the users within the structure and outside the structure.).
The rationale for combining DeLuca with Kwon is articulated above and reincorporated herein by reference.
Claim 3: The Kwon/DeLuca combination discloses those limitations cited above.
Kwon, however, further discloses "generating dwell time data that indicates an average of the users dwell times associated with one or more locations associated with the structure" (Paragraphs 0075, 0078, 0079, 0081. Kwon discloses calculating a positive thinking time based on a third time of arriving at the first location and a fourth time of arriving at the inside point of the restaurant, and calculating a preference of the user based on the positive thinking time, the vector distance, and an average vector distance corresponding to an average of vector distances traveled by other users for the unit time, which reads on generating dwell time data that indicates an average of the users dwell times associated with one or more locations associated with the structure.).
The rationale for combining DeLuca with Kwon is articulated above and reincorporated herein by reference.
Claim 4: The Kwon/DeLuca combination discloses those limitations cited above.
Kwon, however, further discloses "wherein the one or more locations include at least one of a pick-up location; an order location; a table position; a bar position; a gas pump; or a vehicle recharging station" (Paragraphs 0063, 0064, 0065, 0066. Kwon discloses transmitting table location information assigned based on the number of members of the group to the representative visitor terminal, wherein the table location information includes location information about a table assigned based on a pre-registered number of seats and the status of the tables at the restaurant, and transmitting menu information and order request information to the representative visitor terminal and the group member visitor terminal, and transmitting menu order information received from the visitor terminals to the operator terminal of the restaurant, which reads on one or more locations including at least one of a table position and an order location.).
The rationale for combining DeLuca with Kwon is articulated above and reincorporated herein by reference.
Claims 5-7 and 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon/DeLuca in view of Williams et al. (US 20160350837A1).
Claim 5: The Kwon/DeLuca combination discloses those limitations cited above, but does not appear to explicitly describe "receiving, from client devices associated with a second plurality of users, a plurality of orders corresponding to a structure; receiving an indication of a travel route of the second plurality of users to the structure; and fulfilling the orders in accordance with a schedule that is based on estimated times of arrival corresponding to the second plurality of users."
Williams, however, discloses "receiving, from client devices associated with a second plurality of users, a plurality of orders corresponding to a structure; receiving an indication of a travel route of the second plurality of users to the structure; and fulfilling the orders in accordance with a schedule that is based on estimated times of arrival corresponding to the second plurality of users" (Paragraphs 0006, 0028, 0029. Williams discloses receiving, at a computer system and from a mobile computing device, a food order that specifies one or more items to be fulfilled by a particular provider and picked up by a user of the mobile computing device, wherein the mobile computing device provides the food order along with location information identifying the current location of the mobile computing device, and wherein the computer system determines an estimated time of arrival for the user to travel from the current location of the mobile computing device to the location of the particular provider; Paragraphs 0037, 0038. Williams further discloses determining one or more future times at which the particular provider is to begin preparing the one or more items so that the food order will be fulfilled and available for pick-up within a threshold period of time of the user arriving at the particular provider's location, and providing the food order along with fulfillment details including the estimated time of arrival and future times for fulfillment to the provider computer system, which reads on receiving a plurality of orders from client devices associated with a second plurality of users, receiving an indication of a travel route of the second plurality of users to the structure, and fulfilling the orders in accordance with a schedule that is based on estimated times of arrival corresponding to the second plurality of users.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the invention to combine this feature of Williams with those of Kwon/DeLuca. One would have been motivated to do this in order to leverage the beacon-based user location and tracking capabilities of Kwon/DeLuca to enhance order scheduling and fulfillment timing by incorporating Williams' ETA-based intelligent queuing system, thereby ensuring food orders are prepared and ready upon the arrival of users whose positions are being tracked within and approaching the structure.
Claim 6: The Kwon/DeLuca/Williams combination discloses those limitations cited above.
Williams, however, further discloses "determining the estimated times of arrival based on the position of the second plurality of users along their corresponding travel routes; and wherein the schedule is further based on estimated preparation times of items included in second plurality of users' orders" (Paragraphs 0029, 0030, 0031. Williams discloses that the computer system determines the estimated time of arrival based on the current location of the mobile computing device, the location of the provider, the estimated route along which the mobile computing device is likely to travel, current and estimated transit delays along the route, and historical travel times, which reads on determining estimated times of arrival based on the position of the second plurality of users along their corresponding travel routes; Paragraphs 0034, 0035, 0037. Williams further discloses identifying one or more fulfillment time periods for the food order corresponding to lengths of time for the one or more items to be fulfilled, and determining future times at which the particular provider is to begin preparing the items by subtracting the fulfillment times from the estimated time of arrival, which reads on a schedule further based on estimated preparation times of items included in the second plurality of users' orders.).
The rationale for combining Williams with Kwon/DeLuca is articulated above and reincorporated herein by reference.
Claim 7: The Kwon/DeLuca/Williams combination discloses those limitations cited above.
Williams, however, further discloses "wherein the schedule is further based on one or more of: food quality at the time of fulfillment, a dwell time for pick-up or delivery, and/or kitchen staff operations" (Paragraph 0015. Williams discloses that providers can decrease wasted resources including spoiled products, which reads on food quality at the time of fulfillment; Paragraph 0034. Williams further discloses that fulfillment times are determined based on factors including current order volume and staffing levels at the provider and historical staffing levels as correlated with historical food order fulfillment times, which reads on kitchen staff operations; Paragraph 0034. Williams further discloses that the schedule accounts for the time for fulfilling items included in food orders and the current orders pending with the particular provider, which reads on a dwell time for pick-up or delivery.).
The rationale for combining Williams with Kwon/DeLuca is articulated above and reincorporated herein by reference.
Claim 12: The Kwon/DeLuca/Williams combination discloses those limitations cited above. Williams, however, further discloses "receiving a plurality of orders corresponding to the structure for delivery by a plurality of delivery vendors, each delivery vendor corresponding to one or more of the plurality of orders; receiving, for each of the plurality of delivery vendors, an indication of a travel time to the structure; and fulfilling the plurality of orders in accordance with a schedule that is generated based on travel time to the structure corresponding to the plurality of delivery vendors" (Paragraphs 0005–0006, 0029. Williams discloses that the computer system receives food orders from multiple mobile computing devices, each corresponding to a particular provider location; Paragraphs 0056, 0063–0064. Williams further discloses that the arrival estimation module (226) determines estimated times of arrival for each user to travel from the current location of the mobile computing device to the location of the particular provider; Paragraphs 0034–0039, 0065; FIG. 1; FIG. 4B. Williams further discloses that the fulfillment planning subsystem (228) generates an order queue (136) that is prioritized based on each user's estimated time of arrival, wherein orders are inserted at appropriate locations within the queue based on the estimated travel times of the corresponding users; each of which reads on receiving a plurality of orders corresponding to the structure for delivery by a plurality of delivery vendors, receiving an indication of travel time for each delivery vendor, and fulfilling the plurality of orders in accordance with a schedule generated based on travel time to the structure.).
The rationale for combining Williams with Kwon and DeLuca is articulated above and incorporated herein by reference.
Claim 13: The Kwon/DeLuca/Williams combination discloses those limitations cited above. Williams, however, further discloses "determining estimated times of arrival based on the position of the plurality of delivery vendors along their corresponding travel routes to the structure; wherein fulfilling the plurality of orders is further based on items included in the plurality of orders; wherein an order queue is generated based on the schedule and updated as orders are prepared and fulfilled; and wherein the schedule is further based on additional orders received from guests at the structure" (Paragraphs 0055–0056, 0067; FIG. 3A, steps 316, 328–330. Williams discloses that the location module (224) and arrival estimation module (226) continuously receive updated locations of the mobile computing devices and determine updated estimated times of arrival based on the current position of each device along its travel route; Paragraphs 0034–0037, 0065; FIG. 3A, step 318. Williams further discloses that the fulfillment planning subsystem (228) identifies per-item fulfillment time periods for each item included in the order and uses those individual item times to schedule fulfillment; Paragraphs 0038–0039, 0076–0078; FIG. 4B, steps 454–466. Williams further discloses that the order management module (246) generates an order queue, updates the queue display as fulfillment details change, and removes orders upon completion and pickup confirmation; Paragraphs 0065, 0101–0103; FIG. 3A, step 320; FIG. 5. Williams further discloses that the fulfillment planning subsystem accesses current orders pending with the particular provider when determining future fulfillment times, and that the local fulfillment center workstations include a local, voice-based order taking component (532) enabling employees to receive orders directly from customers present at the location, which are integrated into the same ordering backend and fulfillment queue; each of which reads on the limitations recited in claim 13.).
The rationale for combining Williams with Kwon and DeLuca is articulated above and incorporated herein by reference.
Claim 14: The Kwon/DeLuca/Williams combination discloses those limitations cited above. Williams, however, further discloses "wherein the plurality of orders are received from one or more order delivery platforms; and wherein the indication of the travel time to the structure corresponding to the plurality of delivery vendors is received from the one or more order delivery platforms" (Paragraphs 0079–0081, 0089, 0094; FIG. 5. Williams discloses that the ordering backend (520) receives orders from a plurality of platforms including mobile applications (512), web applications (514), SMS/text applications (516), voice interfaces (518), and call center workstations (522), and that the location determinator (502) provides location information to each of those same platforms from which estimated times of arrival are determined, which reads on wherein the plurality of orders are received from one or more order delivery platforms and wherein the indication of the travel time to the structure corresponding to the plurality of delivery vendors is received from the one or more order delivery platforms.).
The rationale for combining Williams with Kwon and DeLuca is articulated above and incorporated herein by reference.
Claim 15: The Kwon/DeLuca/Williams combination discloses those limitations cited above. Williams, however, further discloses "generating a schedule of order completion for the plurality of orders; and communicating, based on the schedule of order completion, an estimated order completion time to each delivery vendor corresponding to the one or more of the plurality of orders" (Paragraph 0074; FIG. 1, steps G–H; FIG. 4A, step 408. Williams discloses that the computer system generates food order instructions constituting a schedule of order completion and provides to each corresponding mobile computing device information identifying an estimated time when the order will be ready/fulfilled by the provider, which reads on generating a schedule of order completion for the plurality of orders and communicating, based on the schedule of order completion, an estimated order completion time to each delivery vendor corresponding to the one or more of the plurality of orders.).
The rationale for combining Williams with Kwon and DeLuca is articulated above and incorporated herein by reference.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon/DeLuca in view of Daigle (US 20110178863A1).
The Kwon/DeLuca combination discloses those limitations cited above, but does not appear to explicitly describe "sending proximity-based promotional data for display by the client devices, wherein the proximity-based promotional data is selected based on the position of the user corresponding to a proximity to one or more locations associated with the structure; and wherein the one or more locations include a kiosk; a product display or a mobile check-out location."
Daigle, however, discloses "sending proximity-based promotional data for display by the client devices, wherein the proximity-based promotional data is selected based on the position of the user corresponding to a proximity to one or more locations associated with the structure; and wherein the one or more locations include a kiosk; a product display or a mobile check-out location" (Paragraphs 0007, 0033, 0048. Daigle discloses a location based consumer interface for retail environments wherein data packet generators distributed around a retail store wirelessly transmit codes to mobile computing devices, and wherein the consumers location within the retail store is determined by detecting a radio frequency signal emitted by a data packet generator, triggering the release of promotional content to the consumer related to the users current location in the retail store, which reads on sending proximity-based promotional data for display by the client devices wherein the promotional data is selected based on the position of the user corresponding to a proximity to one or more locations associated with the structure; Paragraph 0115. Daigle further discloses a kiosk provided near the entrance to the retail site that includes docking stations and various communication cables for coupling the mobile computing device to the network, and a software application that downloads information including promotional content from store servers, which reads on the one or more locations including a kiosk; Paragraphs 0042, 0044, 0048. Daigle further discloses that the retail site includes product displays 130, 132, and 134 with data packet generators mounted to or otherwise connected to the product displays, and that cash register 106 located at checkout counter 150 is a self-service checkout device configured to interact directly with the consumer, and that point of sale technology can be incorporated into the mobile computing device, which reads on the one or more locations including a product display or a mobile check-out location.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the invention to combine this feature of Daigle with those of Kwon/DeLuca. One would have been motivated to do this in order to leverage the beacon-based user location and tracking capabilities of Kwon/DeLuca to enhance the retail consumer experience by delivering location-relevant promotional content to users' mobile devices as they approach specific locations within the structure, including kiosks, product displays, and mobile checkout locations, thereby increasing consumer engagement and purchase conversion rates.
Claims 9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon (US 20230385963 A1) and DeLuca (US 20190053005 A1) in view of Fernandez (US 9,811,846 B2).
Claim 9: The Kwon/DeLuca combination discloses the system of claim 1 as set forth above, but does not appear to explicitly describe "at least one beacon transmitter of the plurality of beacon transmitters is configured to transmit a wireless beacon associated with a service location of a structure configured for mobile checkout"; "detecting one of the client devices at the service location, wherein the one of the client devices is detected in response to an automated reply signal generated by the one of the client devices in response to the wireless beacon"; "establishing an association between the one of the client devices with a transaction at the structure"; "wherein once the association is established, the one of the client devices emits feedback indicating the association"; and "communicating with the one of the client devices to facilitate payment of the transaction placed at the service location based on payment information stored via the one of the client devices."
Fernandez, however, discloses "at least one beacon transmitter of the plurality of beacon transmitters is configured to transmit a wireless beacon associated with a service location of a structure configured for mobile checkout" (Abstract; col. 3, ll. 5–20. Fernandez discloses a proximity sensor associated with a merchant point of sale—for example, a sensor located at a drive-through window or checkout station—that broadcasts beacon signals from fixed locations within an establishment, each beacon signal including a unique identifier for identifying the location of the sensor within the establishment, which reads on at least one beacon transmitter configured to transmit a wireless beacon associated with a service location of a structure configured for mobile checkout.);
"detecting one of the client devices at the service location, wherein the one of the client devices is detected in response to an automated reply signal generated by the one of the client devices in response to the wireless beacon" (FIG. 13, step 1350; FIG. 18; col. 13, ll. 30–65. Fernandez discloses that when a mobile device running a client application moves within a threshold proximity of a sensor, the client application automatically sends a request to the server including the sensor ID, and the server thereby detects the mobile device at the sensor location, which reads on detecting the client device in response to an automated reply signal generated by the client device in response to the wireless beacon.);
"establishing an association between the one of the client devices with a transaction at the structure" (Abstract; Claim 1; col. 3, ll. 10–20. Fernandez discloses generating an invoice from the merchant to the particular consumer based on proximity of the mobile device to the first proximity sensor, thereby associating the detected client device with a pending transaction at the establishment, which reads on establishing an association between the client device with a transaction at the structure.);
"wherein once the association is established, the one of the client devices emits feedback indicating the association" (col. 8, ll. 58–65. Fernandez discloses that the client device control module causes the device to perform actions upon detection of a proximity event, including "playing a sound" and "displaying an image," which reads on the client device emitting feedback upon establishment of the association.); and
"communicating with the one of the client devices to facilitate payment of the transaction placed at the service location based on payment information stored via the one of the client devices" (Abstract; Claim 1; col. 6, ll. 50–58; col. 3, ll. 15–25. Fernandez discloses sending the invoice to the mobile device and processing payment from the consumer based on proximity of the consumer to the second proximity sensor, where payment information is received from a consumer application associated with the consumer's mobile device, which reads on communicating with the client device to facilitate payment based on payment information stored via the client device.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the invention to combine these features of Fernandez with those of Kwon/DeLuca. One would have been motivated to do this in order to provide a complete end-to-end mobile commerce solution within a structure that uses the same underlying beacon signal detection and mobile application communication architecture to enable mobile checkout and payment functionality at designated service locations.
Claim 11: The Kwon/DeLuca/Fernandez combination discloses those limitations cited above. Fernandez, however, further discloses "generating dwell time data that indicates an average of delivery vendor dwell times associated with one or more locations associated with the structure; wherein the one or more locations include a pick-up location" (Col. 30, ll. 30–34. Fernandez discloses that "stored data relating to proximity events may be used to calculate the average time a user spends in an establishment or zone," wherein the zones include defined areas within an establishment such as an entrance, product zones, and exit locations, which reads on generating dwell time data that indicates an average of delivery vendor dwell times associated with one or more locations associated with the structure, wherein the one or more locations include a pick-up location.).
The rationale for combining Fernandez with Kwon and DeLuca is articulated above and incorporated herein by reference.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon/DeLuca/Fernandez in view of Kim (US 20190272571 A1).
The Kwon/DeLuca/Fernandez combination discloses those limitations cited above.
Fernandez, however, further discloses "the payment of the transaction is facilitated automatically without requiring interaction with a user of the one of the client devices" (Abstract; Claim 1; col. 3, ll. 15–20. Fernandez discloses "automatically send the invoice to the consumer and/or receive payment," which reads on facilitating payment automatically without requiring user interaction.); and
"the feedback includes an audible alert" (col. 8, ll. 58–65. Fernandez discloses that the client device control module causes the device to "play a sound" upon a proximity event, which reads on the feedback including an audible alert.).
The Kwon/DeLuca/Fernandez combination, however, does not appear to explicitly describe "the payment information is stored via an electronic wallet of the one of the client devices."
Kim, however, discloses a system wherein "the payment information is stored via an electronic wallet of the one of the client devices" (Paragraphs 0034, 0048; FIG. 1, element 111. Kim discloses that the user network device includes a digital wallet application that encompasses "any application, hardware, software, or process the user device may employ to assist the user in completing a purchase," and that the order application employs the digital wallet to conduct the payment transaction with the merchant, which reads on the payment information being stored via an electronic wallet of the client device.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the invention to combine this feature of Kim with those of Kwon/DeLuca/Fernandez. One would have been motivated to do this in order to store payment information via a digital wallet as specifically disclosed by Kim, as Kim expressly identifies the digital wallet as the standard mechanism for storing and transmitting payment credentials on a mobile device in mobile transaction systems, yielding the predictable result of a more secure and user-friendly payment experience without altering the fundamental proximity-triggered payment functionality of the combined system.
Claims 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon et al. (US 20230385963A1) in view of DeLuca (US 20190053005A1) and further in view of Bertram et al. (US 20120197729A1).
Claim 16: The Kwon/DeLuca combination discloses those limitations cited above, but does not appear to explicitly describe "wherein the location data indicates the position of the user corresponding to a shelf position within the structure; and wherein the operations further include sending proximity-based promotional data for display by the client device, wherein the proximity-based promotional data is selected based on the position of the user corresponding to the shelf position within the structure."
Bertram, however, discloses a system "wherein the location data indicates the position of the user corresponding to a shelf position within the structure; and wherein the operations further include sending proximity-based promotional data for display by the client device, wherein the proximity-based promotional data is selected based on the position of the user corresponding to the shelf position within the structure" (Paragraphs 0013, 0018, 0019. Bertram discloses wireless transceivers 120-124 positioned amongst shelves 110-113 proximate product groups, wherein each transceiver's unique digital identifier is uniquely correlated with a particular retailer, store, and a particular location within a particular store, and wherein the shelf transceivers distribution plan is overlaid with the store's shelf product plan including the store planogram to correlate each shelf transceiver's unique digital identifier with the then current grouping of one or more product categories proximate each transceiver, which reads on location data indicating the position of the user corresponding to a shelf position within the structure; Paragraphs 0024, 0034, 0037, 0038. Bertram further discloses that as shoppers pass by shelf transceivers 120-124 they are exposed to periodic wireless transmissions from nearby shelf transceivers, and that the Promotion Targeting Engine determines whether the shelf transceiver message should be acted upon and what promotional action to take, and sends a promotion request response to the smartphone for display to the shopper, which reads on sending proximity-based promotional data for display by the client device wherein the promotional data is selected based on the position of the user corresponding to the shelf position within the structure.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the invention to combine this feature of Bertram with those of Kwon/DeLuca. One would have been motivated to do this in order to provide granular shelf-level position tracking and targeted promotional delivery tied to specific product locations within the structure, thereby enabling more precise and effective promotion targeting based on a user's proximity to specific shelving locations and associated products.
Claim 17: The Kwon/DeLuca/Bertram combination discloses those limitations cited above.
Bertram, however, further discloses a system "wherein the shelf position corresponds to a product display and wherein the proximity-based promotional data is based on the products associated with the product display" (Paragraphs 0013, 0020, 0034, 0035. Bertram discloses that shelf transceivers 120-124 are positioned proximate product groups for which a promotion is offered, wherein each shelf transceiver and its digital identifier is associated with one or more promotional offers for products located proximate the shelf transmitter physical location, and wherein the Promotion Targeting Engine determines promotion eligibility based on product categories associated with the transceiver digital identifier, which reads on the shelf position corresponding to a product display wherein the proximity-based promotional data is based on the products associated with the product display.).
The rationale for combining Bertram with Kwon/DeLuca is articulated above and reincorporated herein by reference.
Claims 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon/DeLuca in view of Todeschini (US 10,715,974 B2) and in further view of Snapp (US 9,753,117 B2).
Claim 18: The Kwon/DeLuca combination discloses those limitations cited above, but does not appear to explicitly disclose a system wherein another client device includes a processor configured to perform client device operations that include: generating, via a touch screen, a graphical user interface that presents display screens and generates commands in response to user interactions; receiving, via the graphical user interface, beacon transmitter registration data that indicates modes of use for each of the plurality of beacon transmitters; sending, via a first wireless interface and based on the beacon transmitter registration data, an initial configuration of wireless settings for each of the plurality of beacon transmitters; performing, utilizing the first wireless interface and via the graphical user interface, a calibration of the wireless settings of each of the plurality of beacon transmitters; performing, utilizing the first wireless interface and via the graphical user interface, an operational validation of each of the plurality of beacon transmitters; and based on the operational validation of each of the plurality of beacon transmitters, transmitting via a second wireless interface, the wireless settings and the beacon transmitter registration data to the processing system.
Todeschini, however, discloses a system wherein "another client device includes a processor configured to perform client device operations that include: generating, via a touch screen, a graphical user interface that presents display screens and generates commands in response to user interactions" (col. 5:53–58, FIG. 3, step 312. Todeschini discloses a mobile device having a touchscreen display that executes a mapping application presenting a graphical user interface, through which a user views a facility floor plan and generates commands by interacting with display screens to register and provision beacon devices);
"receiving, via the graphical user interface, beacon transmitter registration data that indicates modes of use for each of the plurality of beacon transmitters" (col. 6:62–67, col. 8:63–67, FIG. 3 step 312, FIG. 4A step 414. Todeschini discloses that the mobile device receives, via the graphical user interface, the unique identifier and spatial coordinate of each beacon, where the spatial coordinate constitutes the mode of use for each beacon within the facility floor plan);
"sending, via a first wireless interface and based on the beacon transmitter registration data, an initial configuration of wireless settings for each of the plurality of beacon transmitters" (col. 6:28–42, col. 8:16–24, col. 8:33–44, FIG. 4A steps 416–418. Todeschini discloses that the mobile device sends, via a first wireless interface comprising Bluetooth Low Energy / BT GATT, wireless signals to selected beacons based on measured signal strength, instructing each beacon to display its barcode, constituting an initial wireless settings configuration transmitted via the first wireless interface); and
"performing, utilizing the first wireless interface and via the graphical user interface, a calibration of the wireless settings of each of the plurality of beacon transmitters" (col. 6:33–42, col. 8:16–32, FIG. 4A steps 416–418. Todeschini discloses that the mobile device measures the RSSI signal strength of each beacon via the first wireless interface and selects beacons having signal strengths above a predefined threshold value, constituting a calibration of the wireless settings of each beacon, performed via the first wireless interface and reflected through the graphical user interface floor plan display).
Todeschini, however, does not appear to explicitly describe "performing, utilizing the first wireless interface and via the graphical user interface, an operational validation of each of the plurality of beacon transmitters; and based on the operational validation of each of the plurality of beacon transmitters, transmitting via a second wireless interface, the wireless settings and the beacon transmitter registration data to the processing system."
Snapp, however, discloses "performing, utilizing the first wireless interface and via the graphical user interface, an operational validation of each of the plurality of beacon transmitters; and based on the operational validation of each of the plurality of beacon transmitters, transmitting via a second wireless interface, the wireless settings and the beacon transmitter registration data to the processing system" (Abstract; col. 5:5–9, col. 7:18–32, col. 10:22–44, FIG. 3 steps 302–305. Snapp discloses that a beacon reporting device receives beacon identification signals via a first wireless interface, correlates each beacon identifier to a stored beacon location record, determines whether the validation location is proximal to the stored beacon location and thereupon designates each beacon as validated, constituting operational validation of each beacon transmitter, and upon validation transmits the beacon identifier and location data to a Wireless Beacon Location Record Server via a second wireless network interface comprising WiFi, GPRS, or LTE, distinct from the local BLE interface used for beacon detection, constituting transmission of wireless settings and beacon registration data to the processing system via a second wireless interface based on the operational validation).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the invention to combine these features of Todeschini and Snapp with those of Kwon and DeLuca. One would have been motivated to do this in order to provide the operator of Kwon's beacon-based restaurant system with a systematic, GUI-driven workflow for registering, configuring, and calibrating each beacon's wireless settings prior to deployment, and to further confirm that each beacon accurately corresponds to its registered location before transmitting validated configuration data to the processing system, thereby preventing erroneous location-based service delivery that would otherwise result from unvalidated beacon placement, as Snapp expressly recognizes this need (Snapp, col. 3:28–50).
Claim 19: The Kwon/DeLuca/Todeschini/Snapp combination discloses those limitations cited above.
Todeschini, however, further discloses "the client device operations further include: capturing optical data corresponding to each of the plurality of beacon transmitters, wherein the optical data includes beacon identification data that uniquely identifies each of the plurality of beacon transmitters" (Abstract, col. 6:13–17, FIG. 4A steps 410–412. The mobile device captures optical data by scanning a barcode displayed on each beacon, wherein the barcode encodes the beacon's unique MAC address constituting beacon identification data that uniquely identifies each beacon transmitter);
"generating a mapping of the beacon identification for each of the plurality of beacon transmitters to the beacon transmitter registration data for each of the plurality of beacon transmitters" (col. 6:62–67, col. 8:63–67, FIG. 4A step 414. The mobile device generates a mapping of each beacon's unique identifier to its associated spatial coordinate and location information on the facility floor plan, constituting a mapping of beacon identification to beacon transmitter registration data); and
"transmitting the mapping to the processing system" (col. 8:35–37, col. 10:14–18. The mobile device transmits the beacon identifier and location mapping to a backend database via a network interface, constituting transmission of the mapping to the processing system).
The rationale for combining Todeschini and Snapp with Kwon and DeLuca is articulated above and reincorporated herein by reference.
Claim 20: The Kwon/DeLuca/Todeschini/Snapp combination discloses those limitations cited above.
Snapp, however, further discloses "the beacon transmitter registration data corresponding to one of the plurality of beacon transmitters indicates one of the modes of use corresponding to an installation under a table of the structure and further indicates at least one of: a positioning of the table; a table position at the table; a composition of the table; a shape of the table; or a size of the table" (col. 8:1–23, col. 9:1–10, FIG. 2, fields 202–205. Each wireless beacon location record stores structured metadata for each beacon including a Beacon Location comprising precise positional coordinates constituting a positioning of the table, a Beacon Coverage Shape comprising a sphere, cube, extruded polygon, rectangle, or circle constituting a shape and size of the coverage area associated with the beacon's installation point, and a Beacon Address comprising building identification, floor identification, and room identification constituting a table position within the structure, each of which constitutes beacon transmitter registration data indicating the physical installation context of each beacon transmitter).
The rationale for combining Snapp with Kwon, DeLuca, and Todeschini is articulated above and reincorporated herein by reference.
Other Relevant Prior Art
Though not relied upon in the aforementioned rejections, the following references are nevertheless deemed to be relevant to Applicant’s disclosures:
Theobald et al. (11328372), directed to the communication of orders and payments in a drive through using wireless beacons.
Gilbey et al. (10289994), directed to a method of associating a customer’s mobile computer device with an order for goods and/or services taken by a waiter in a merchant venue.
Gkoufas et al. (11555707), directed to collaborative positioning navigation.
Chatterton et al. (20160283979), directed to contextually aware billboard display devices using wireless beacon device communications.
Carter et al. (20200364810), directed to an improved order management system and method.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER BUSCH whose telephone number is (571)270-7953. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10-7.
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, Waseem Ashraf can be reached at 571-270-3948. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER C BUSCH/Examiner, Art Unit 3621
/WASEEM ASHRAF/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3621