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 .
Continuation Data
This application claims priority to PCT/IB2022/057288 filed August 5, 2022.
Information Disclosure Statement
3. The Information Disclosure Statements filed on February 4, 2025 and February 5, 2025 have been considered. initialed copies of the Form 1449 are enclosed herewith.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Paske et al (2014/0158766), hereinafter Paske in view of Yavari et al (2020/0030039), hereinafter Yavari.
With respect to claim 1, Paske teaches an RFID tunnel reader comprising: an electronic reader configured to read a plurality of electronic labels (RFID reader 18 configured to read RFID transponders on objects conveyed through the RFID reading tunnel 10: paragraph 0024 and figure 1) and antennas 16 in communication with the electronic reader 18 (RFID antennas 16 are connected to the RFID reader 18, wherein the antennas define a reading zone 20 within the tunnel through which objects bearing RFID tags pass for interrogation: paragraphs 0025-0025).
Paske’s teaches an RFID tunnel reader, however fails to teach that the RFID tunnel reader is portable or that it includes a collapsible antenna body having a hollow tube antenna body, wherein the antenna body comprises two or more antenna sections movably connected to one another.
With respect to claim 1, Yavari teaches a portable, collapsible antenna having an antenna body comprising multiple tubular sections movably connected by joints (35), wherein the joints permit the antenna to move between deployed and collapsed configurations (see figure 46 and 47). The detection antennas may be formed from hollow metal tubes (paragraph 0003-0005, 0060-0062, and 0089-0091, and figures 9, 46, and 47.
In view of Yavari’s teachings, it would have been obvious to an artisan of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the RFID reading tunnel of Paske to include the collapsible antenna of Yavari, thereby making the reading tunnel portable. Paske teaches in paragraph 0006 using a modular design so the tunnel can be installed more simply and recognizes that RFID reading tunnels are large and difficult to transport and assemble. Therefore one would be motivated to include a collapsible antenna in order to achieve portability, transportation, and allow for easy storage of the RFID reading tunnel.
7. Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Paske in combination with Yavari and in further view of Lo et al (2006/0187136).
Paske’s teachings in combination with the teachings of Yavari are discussed above. The combination however fails to specifically teach the antenna being movably attached to the electronic reader so that the antenna is collapsible toward the electronic reader.
With respect to claim 5, Lo teaches the antenna being movably attached to the electronic reader so that the antenna is collapsible toward the electronic reader (the plate antenna is pivotally connected to the host: paragraphs 0018-0019).
In view of Lo’s teachings, it would have been obvious to an artisan of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Paske/Yavari’s portable RFID tunnel reader to movably attach the antenna to the electronic reader as taught by Lo. One would be motivated to movably attach the antenna to the reader in order to allow the device to occupy less space during storage and transport while remaining deployable for operation.
Allowable Subject Matter
8. Claims 2-4 and 6-8 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form, including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is an examiner’s reason for allowance: Although Paske in combination with Yavari teaches a portable RFID tunnel reader comprising an electronic reader, a collapsible antenna, a hollow antenna tube antenna body, and wherein the antenna body comprises two or more antenna sections, the above identified prior art of record, taken alone, or in combination with any other prior art, fails to teach or fairly suggest the specific features of claims 2-4 and 4-8 of the present claimed invention. Specifically, prior art fails to teach the portable RFID tunnel reader, wherein the two or more antenna sections comprise metal antenna plates, and wherein the metal antenna plates are foldably connected to one another so that the antenna body is foldable and further fails to teach the portable RFID tunnel reader, wherein the hollow tube antenna body has a cuboid shape and comprises four or more sections, each section hingedly attached to two adjacent sections. Prior art fails to specifically teach the portable RFID tunnel reader, wherein the RFID tunnel reader is configurable to be in either an expanded configuration or a collapsed configuration. Lastly, prior art fails to teach the portable RFID tunnel reader, wherein the collapsible antenna comprises at least one current feed point and at least one current return point, the feed and return points electrically connected to the antenna body so that a current flowing through the antenna body generates a magnetic field within the read region for reading RFID tags, wherein the antenna body comprises an electric break so that the at least one current feed point provides current to the antenna body on a first side of the electric break, and the at least one current return point provides a current return path on a second opposite side of the break, and wherein the electric break comprises a dielectric gap in the antenna body. The above limitations are not disclosed in prior art and moreover, one of ordinary skill in the art would not have been motivated to come to the claimed invention.
Conclusion
9. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure: See attached PTO form 892, Refence Cited.
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Allyson N. Trail whose telephone number is (571) 272-2406. The examiner can normally be reached between the hours of 7:30AM to 4:00PM Monday thru Friday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Thomas Pham, can be reached on (571) 272-3689. The fax phone number for this Group is (571) 273-8300.
Communications via Internet e-mail regarding this application, other than those under 35 U.S.C. 132 or which otherwise require a signature, may be used by the applicant and should be addressed to [allyson.trail@uspto.gov].
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/ALLYSON N TRAIL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876
August 5, 2026
Prosecution Insights