DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 6-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Sindelar et al, US Pub. 2024/0311602.
Sindelar et al disclose transaction cards comprising: a card substrate comprising an antenna recess (the antenna may be printed to form a recess); an antenna received in the antenna recess(par. 0032); a chip opening in the antenna recess 210; a chip received in the chip opening, wherein the antenna is in electrical communication with the chip (Fig. 2A); and a non-blocking material positioned over the chip and the antenna in the antenna recess (conductive material 115); wherein the non-blocking material allows radio frequency waves to pass to the antenna, wherein the chip comprises electrical contacts that are accessible through the chip opening (Fig. 1-4; par. 0041-0051).
Regarding claims 2-3, wherein the card substrate comprises a material that blocks radio frequency communication (the substrate could be of metal; par. 0047, 0051).
Regarding 4, wherein the antenna comprises an antenna array (see Fig. 2A).
Regarding claim 6, further comprising a magnetic stripe (see Fig. 2B; par. 0049).
Regarding claims 7 and 12, in addition to the rejection of claim 1 above, the prior art discloses a first card substrate layer a second card substrate layer for installing the components and covering the components (Fig. 1B); an antenna positioned between the first card substrate layer and the second card substrate layer, the antenna located on a perimeter of the first card substrate layer and the second card substrate layer (Fig. 3); a chip opening in the first card substrate layer; and a chip received in the chip opening, wherein the antenna is in electrical communication with the chip (see par. 0041-0051).
Regarding claims 8-9 and 13-14, wherein the card substrate comprises a material that blocks radio frequency communication (the substrate could be of metal; par. 0047, 0051).
Regarding claims 10 and 15, wherein the antenna comprises an antenna array (see Fig. 2A).
Regarding claims 11 and 16, wherein the chip comprises electrical contacts that are accessible through the chip opening (see par. 0045).
Regarding claim 17, further comprising a magnetic stripe (see Fig. 2B; par. 0049).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5/12/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. See examiner remarks.
Remarks:
In response to the applicant’s argument regarding claim 1, the examiner respectfully disagrees. The chip is permanently positioned within an opening in the card, in order to read information in the card through contact reading the electrical contacts must be accessible through the chip opening. When the card is inserted into a reader, the chip electrical contacts mate the reader electrical contacts in order to exchange information. The applicant’s argument is not persuasive. Regarding the applicant argument of claim 7, the examiner respectfully disagrees. The prior art teaches at least two substrates, the transaction card may be two blanks (front and back) where blanks are formed from stamping substrates, where the antenna may be inserted or formed into one of the blanks and the chip and magnetic strip may be inserted in the voids 210 and 230 (Fig. 2; par. 0050); the blanks (i.e. the substrate layers) sandwich the antenna along the card periphery. The applicant’s argument is not persuasive. Regarding the applicant’s argument of claim 12, the examiner respectfully disagrees. The prior art teaches that the antenna is formed or inserted into one of the substrates (i.e. blanks) and the other substrate has voids for receiving the chip and the magnetic stripe (par. 0050+). The applicant’s argument is not persuasive. Refer to the rejection above.
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 DANIEL ST CYR whose telephone number is (571)272-2407. The examiner can normally be reached M to F 8:00-8:00.
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, Michael G Lee can be reached at 571-272-2398. 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.
DANIEL ST CYR
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2876
/DANIEL ST CYR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876
Prosecution Insights