DETAILED ACTION
This action is in reply to the submission filed on 2/13/2025.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been examined.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1: the claims fall under statutory categories of processes and/or machines.
Step 2A Prong 1: the claims recite: detecting a biometric or transaction device proximate to a POS, providing instructions for presenting the device to a target sensor on the POS, providing feedback on the presentation of the device to the sensor, capturing information from the device, and providing instructions for removing the device from the POS. These limitations, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers certain methods of organizing human activity, including managing personal behavior and/or interactions between people, as well as sales activities/behaviors and business relations.
Step 2A Prong 2: Said judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claims as a whole, looking at the additional elements: a computer program executed by a POS for implementing the claimed instructions, a display for providing information, and a target sensor for capturing information, as well as a controller, point of transaction device, LEDs and a non-transitory computer-readable medium including computer executable instructions for performing the claimed steps individually and in combination, merely use a computer (see MPEP 2106.05f.) The claims use these machines in their ordinary capacity for the purpose of applying the abstract idea(s). Therefore, these limitations are invoking computers or other machinery merely as a tool to perform an existing process, such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception. Then, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and the claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B: Said claims recite additional elements as listed above, which are not sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because, as mentioned in Step 2A Prong 2, they use computers or other machinery to perform an abstract idea in such a way that amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using computers or other machinery. Mere instructions to apply an exception using computers or other machinery cannot provide an inventive concept. Therefore, the claim is not patent eligible.
Claims 2, 9, 10 and 16 include a camera, wireless reader, or touch-sensitive area as the information gathering target sensor. These specifying limitations are still using computing technology in its ordinary capacity, including data gathering, to perform the abstract idea.
Claims 3, 11 and 17 recite an image or video guidance as feedback. Claims 4, 12 and 18 recite a proximity sensor enabling feedback based on the device location. Claims 5 and 19 recite providing instructions by illuminating an area on the transaction device proximate to the target sensor. Claims 6 and 13 recite providing instructions by illuminating a boundary area comprising one or more LEDs and graphical elements on the display, said elements providing continuity with the LEDs. Claims 7, 14 and 20 recite the boundary area illumination is dynamic and changes during the course of the presentation. This can still be seen as managing human activity being performed by computing technology in its ordinary capacity.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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, 4-10, 12-16 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maloney (US 2014/0327660) in view of Detrick (US 2020/0294020).
Claims 1, 8 and 15. Maloney teaches a method, comprising:
detecting, by a computer program executed by an interactive point of transaction device, a biometric or a transaction device proximate to the interactive point of transaction device; (paragraph 154 showing motion detector detecting activity of biometric device nearby ECDU…para. 162 showing ECDU containing POS)
providing, by the computer program and on the interactive point of transaction device, instructions for presenting the biometric or the transaction device to a target sensor on the interactive point of transaction device; (para. 154 showing instructions to user for performance of POS including biometric ID authentication)
providing, by the computer program, feedback on the presentation of the biometric or the transaction device to the target sensor on a display; and (para. 154 showing bio feedback including re-presenting data in response to feedback)
capturing, by the computer program and using the target sensor, information from the biometric or the transaction device. (para. 154 showing capture of user biometric data)
Maloney does not, but Detrick teaches providing, by the computer program, instructions for removing the biometric or the transaction device from the interactive point of transaction device. (para. 70 showing instructions for user to remove card)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system of POS guidance in Maloney, with the known technique of providing users instructions in Detrick, because applying the known technique would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system by ensuring the user is instructed throughout the transaction. See para. 70 of Detrick.
Claim 8 additionally: controller, display, plurality of LEDs, and a memory storing a computer program. (para. 154 showing LEDs, displays…para. 17 program…para. 152 memory and controller)
Claim 15 additionally: a non-transitory computer readable storage medium including instructions stored thereon, which when read and executed by one or more computer processors cause the one or more processors to perform steps. (para. 161 showing physical memory for software of ECDU/POS)
Claims 2 and 16. Maloney as modified by Detrick teaches the method of claim 1. Maloney teaches wherein the target sensor comprises a camera, a wireless reader, or a touch-sensitive area on the interactive point of transaction device. (para. 154 showing camera for facial recognition)
Claim 9. Maloney as modified by Detrick teaches the method of claim 8. Maloney teaches wherein the target sensor comprises a camera, or a wireless reader. (para. 154 showing camera for facial recognition)
Claim 10. Maloney as modified by Detrick teaches the method of claim 8. Maloney teaches wherein the target sensor comprises a touch-sensitive area on the interactive point of transaction device. (para. 154 showing fingerprint reader for bio ID)
Claims 4, 12 and 18. Maloney as modified by Detrick teaches the method of claim 1. Maloney teaches further comprising: sensing, by a proximity sensor in the interactive point of transaction device, a location of the biometric or the transaction device relative to the interactive point of transaction device, (motion sensing of user in para. 154.)
wherein the feedback is based on the location. (paragraphs 154 and 155 showing auto start-stop based on nearby motion)
Claims 5 and 19. Maloney as modified by Detrick teaches the method of claim 1. Maloney teaches wherein the step of providing instructions for presenting the biometric or the transaction device to a target sensor on the interactive point of transaction device comprises:
illuminating, by the computer program, an area on the interactive point of transaction device that is proximate to the target sensor. (para. 154 showing illuminated areas near biometric ID device)
Claims 6 and 13. Maloney as modified by Detrick teaches the method of claim 5. Maloney teaches wherein the step of illuminating an area proximate to the target sensor comprises illuminating a boundary area comprising one or more light emitting diodes and one or more graphical elements on the display, wherein the graphical elements are displayed to provide continuity with the one or more light emitting diodes. (para. 154 showing LED as well as display LCD illuminated nearby biometric device in conjunction for instructing users on biometric authentication. “The design labels are colored using the same colors as the indicator lights to further aid in selection of the appropriate biometric ID.”)
Claims 7, 14 and 20. Maloney teaches the method of claim 6. Maloney teaches wherein the illumination of the boundary area is dynamic and changes during the course of the presentation. (para. 154 showing lights activated in response to readiness of biometric ID component)
Claims 1-2, 4-10, 12-16 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maloney (US 2014/0327660) in view of Detrick (US 2020/0294020), and in further view of Peri (US 2017/0178103).
Claims 3, 11 and 17. Maloney as modified by Detrick teaches the method of claim 1. Maloney teaches feedback on biometric authentication, as well as recording the user (para. 154). It does not, but Peri teaches wherein the feedback comprises an image or a video of the biometric or the transaction device being presented to the target sensor. (para. 40 showing animation guidance for presenting device to POS)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system of POS guidance in said modified Maloney, with the known technique of picture-based instructions in Peri because applying the known technique would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system by allowing guidance to a user. See para. 38 of Peri.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Aaron Tutor, whose telephone number is 571-272-3662. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 9 AM to 5 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Fahd Obeid, can be reached at 571-270-3324. The fax number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-5266.
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.
/AARON TUTOR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627
Prosecution Insights