DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-8, 10, 11, 15-24 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zachaus [US 20230081750] in view of Uland et al. [US 20180253632].
As to claim 15. Zachaus discloses An apparatus for securely holding an item, the apparatus comprising:
a case having a closeable opening defining an interior volume, [fig. 2, 0039] container 10 with a closable lid 7 and a receptacle 10, said volume configured to hold the item when the opening is in a closed state, [fig. 2, 0039] container 10 configured to hold an item 6; and
a wire disposed on the case, [fig. 2, 0043] a conductive element 9 in a sealing member 3, the wire having:
a first end not coupled to a first bonding pad of an NFC tag but configured to electrically couple to said first bonding pad of an NFC tag, [fig. 2, 0043] the conductive element 9 is galvanically connected to the monitoring pads 1 and 2 at the two ends, and
a second end configured to electrically couple to a second bonding pad of the NFC tag, [fig. 2, 0043] the conductive element 9 is electrically connected to the monitoring pads 1 and 2 at the two ends,
wherein the wire is configured to configure the NFC tag into a tamper-detecting NFC tag by providing an electrical connection between the first bonding pad and the second bonding pad, [0044-0045].
Zachaus fails to disclose wherein the wire is disposed at a plurality of edges of the case.
Uland teaches a smart tag used for detecting opening or tampering of a package, [0048]; comprising a security tag 100, with pads 130, 132 to connect a continuity sensor/ sense line 140 to the tag, [figs. 1, 4B, 0058, 0060]; wherein the sense line 140 can be disposed on at least three sides of the top of the container 150 mating with a flap 155b formed as a top cover of the container 150, [0086].
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Zachaus with that of Uland so that the sense line can cover all possible edges of the container mating with an openable portion of the container.
As to claim 16. Zachaus discloses The apparatus of claim 15 wherein when the NFC tag is coupled to the case to cover to the closeable opening, [fig. 2, 0042] sealing member 3 attached to cover the closable lid 7, and the first end of the wire is electrically coupled to the first bonding pad and the second end of the wire is electrically coupled to the second bonding pad, [fig. 2, 0043] the conductive element 9 is electrically connected to the monitoring pads 1 and 2 at the two ends, the NFC tag is configured to transmit information indicating a subsequent opening of the closeable opening, [0044, 0045] the system 5 outputs a taper event signal when the sealing member is tampered with.
As to claim 17. Zachaus fails to disclose The apparatus of claim 15, wherein the wire configured to be disposed at a plurality of edges of the case so as to detect opening of the case at any of said edges.
Uland teaches a smart tag used for detecting opening or tampering of a package, [0048]; comprising a security tag 100, with pads 130, 132 to connect a continuity sensor/ sense line 140 to the tag, [figs. 1, 4B, 0058, 0060]; wherein the sense line 140 can be disposed on at least three sides of the top of the container 150 mating with a flap 155b formed as a top cover of the container 150, [0086].
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Zachaus with that of Uland so that the system can be used to sense tampering for a plurality of compartments of the same container.
As to claim 18. Zachaus discloses The apparatus of claim 15, wherein the wire is configured to couple to a particular NFC tag, [fig. 2, 0043].
Zachaus fails to explicitly disclose wherein for which particular NFC tag is specifically associated with a particular item disposed within the interior volume.
Uland teaches a smart tag used for detecting opening or tampering of a package, [0048]; comprising a security tag 100, with pads 130, 132 to connect a continuity sensor/ sense line 140 to the tag, [figs. 1, 4B, 0058, 0060]; wherein tag memory contains identification and product information, [0060].
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Zachaus with that of Uland so that the product contained can easily be identified without opening the container.
As to claim 19. Zachaus discloses The apparatus of claim 18, wherein the particular NFC tag is configured to cause a device to cause display, on a computer screen, [0046] sends tamper event to a display device.
Zachaus fails to explicitly disclose wherein the device is a reader, and the step is in response to being read by the reader, of a digital experience, the digital experience including information describing the particular item.
Uland teaches a smart tag used for detecting opening or tampering of a package, [0048]; comprising a security tag 100, with pads 130, 132 to connect a continuity sensor/ sense line 140 to the tag, [figs. 1, 4B, 0058, 0060]; wherein tag memory contains identification and product information, [0060]; wherein tag sends information to a reader in response to a reader reading the state of the tag, [0134].
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Zachaus with that of Uland so that the user can determine the state of the package using a reader.
As to claim 20. Zachaus fails to disclose The apparatus of claim 18, wherein the particular NFC tag comprises a memory storing information identifying an owner of the particular item, and the digital experience includes said information identifying said owner of the particular item.
Uland teaches a smart tag used for detecting opening or tampering of a package, [0048]; comprising a security tag 100, with pads 130, 132 to connect a continuity sensor/ sense line 140 to the tag, [figs. 1, 4B, 0058, 0060]; wherein tag memory contains identification and product information, [0060]; including data about manufacturer and reseller, [0107, 0108].
Uland, in [0108], teaches that the tag allows the user to enter information.
One of ordinary skill in the art can understand that any information can be entered including any information that can be used to identify the product; wherein ownership information of the product is known to be used to identify the product in conditions where the container is shipped with other containers.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Zachaus with that of Uland so that the product contained can easily be identified without opening the container.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-8, 10, 11, 21-24 allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9/21/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Argument 1: The prior arts on file do not teach a wire disposed at a plurality of edges the case.
Response 1: Uland, [0086], teaches having a container with a single lid 155b, wherein the sense line 140 can be disposed to cover all the edges of the lid that make contact with three of the top four edges of the container 150.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 BENYAM HAILE whose telephone number is (571)272-2080. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00 AM - 5:30 PM Mon. - Thur..
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, Steven Lim can be reached at (571)270-1210. 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.
/Benyam Haile/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2688
