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 § 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 (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 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 1-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ibi et al. (US Pub 2006/0077039) in view of Husak et al. (US Pub 2006/0022801).
As of claims 1 and 11, Ibi discloses an RFID reader system, comprising:
a first region configured to allow movement of one or more RFID devices into the first region, through the first region, and out of the first region (via tags moving on conveyor from range 21P towards range 21A; see figs. 22-23, tag);
a second region configured to allow movement of the one or more RFID devices into the second region after traveling through the first region, through the second region, and out of the second region (via tags moving on conveyor from range 21P towards range 21A; see figs. 22-23, tag);
a first transceiver configured to provide the one or more RFID devices traveling through the first region with a precharge using a first command (via reader/writer 41 transmitting a command to the tags in range 21P; see paragraph [0066] and [0185]-[0186]); and
a second transceiver configured to use the precharge from the first transceiver to accelerate and complete communication with the one or more precharged RFID devices while the one or more precharged RFID devices are traversing the second region (Ibi discloses that to interrogate tags, first reader/antenna can transmit a command to the tag and the second reader/antenna can receive response from the tag based on the signal transmitted by the first reader/antenna; see paragraph [0063] and [0185]-[0187]).
Claim language does not define “precharge”. Based on the explanation given above, Ibi is interpreted to include the limitation of “precharge”, since second reader receives response based on the command transmitted by the first reader.
Based on the specification (paragraph [0028]) the term "precharge" may refer to an activation or actuation of the one or more RFID devices from a deactivated or a sleep configuration to an excited configuration or activated configuration. In some embodiments, "precharge" may simply refer to providing sufficient energy to an RFID device via RF energy to accelerate its response time from one or more milliseconds to microseconds
In order to support further support the Examiner’s assertion, Husak discloses an interrogation system, wherien a first reader transmits power (precharge) to the tag and the second reader receives data from the powered tag to accelerate and complete communication with the tag (see paragraphs [0077] and [0131]).
From the teaching of Husak it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the system of Ibi to include the function of one reader powering the tag and the other reader receiving data from the tag in order to improve interrogation process (see paragraph [0131]).
As of claims 2 and 12, combination of Ibi and Husak does not explicitly discloses that the precharge enables the second transceiver to initiate and perform communication with the precharged one or more RFID devices moving through the second region at an average rate that is above a threshold (The Examiner takes official notice that in the system of RFID it is known in the art that the conventional conveyors of the distribution centers move very fast about 600 feet per second; see Wilkinson US Pub 2017/0372106; paragraph [0038]; also see Dhont (US 5,247,304) col. 2, lines 3-16).
As of claims 3 and 13, combination of Ibi and Husak does not explicitly discloses that the threshold rate is at least 3 feet per second (The Examiner takes official notice that in the system of RFID it is known in the art that the conventional conveyors of the distribution centers move very fast about 600 feet per second; see Wilkinson US Pub 2017/0372106; paragraph [0038]; also see Dhont (US 5,247,304) col. 2, lines 3-16).
As of claims 4 and 14, Ibi discloses a conveyor for transporting the one or more RFID devices through the first region and the second region (via conveyer belt; see paragraph [0057]).
As of claims 5 and 15, Ibi discloses that the one or more RFID devices are configured to switch between a first state and a second state (via tag generating electrical power from the received radio wave transmitted from the reader/writer an sending back response information to the reader/writer; see paragraph [0066]).
As of claims 6 and 16, combination of Ibi and Husak does not explicitly disclose that the first state of the one or more RFID devices includes a secured state that blocks access to the one or more RFID devices in the secured state. The Examiner takes official notice that it is well known in the art of RFID tags operate in a secured state and accessible state wherien an authorized reader can access some or all of tag’s information (see Stanford et al. (US 11,783,140), col. 11, lines 4-25).
As of claims 7, 17 and 21, combination of Ibi and Husak does not explicitly disclose that the second state of the one or more RFID devices includes an accessible state that allows the one or more RFID devices in the second state to communicate with one or more authorized readers. The Examiner takes official notice that it is well known in the art of RFID tags operate in a secured state and accessible state wherien an authorized reader can access some or all of tag’s information (see Stanford et al. (US 11,783,140), col. 11, lines 4-25).
As of claims 8 and 18, The Examiner takes official notice that it is well known in RFID to have a tunnel enclosing the first region and the second region (see Roth US Pub 2022/0318532, abstract).
As of claims 9 and 19, combination of Ibi and Husak does not explicitly disclose that the one or more Radio Frequency (RF) light curtains disposed between the first region and the second region to avoid leakage of RF signals and to enable efficient communication between the one or more RFID devices and only one of the first transceiver and the second transceiver at a time. The Examiner takes official notice that it is well known in the art to use RF shielding to reduce unintended RFID reads; see Roth (US Pub 2022/0318532), paragraph [0007], also see Hillegass (US Pub 2006/0226989) paragraph [0172]).
As of claims 10 and 20, Husak discloses one or more sensors to detect the position of the one or more RFID devices (via detectors for determining the location and/or direction of the movement of the tags; see paragraph [0014]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Posamentier (US 7,986,235) wherein a first reader (primary reader 110) transmits and enabling signal to tags and second reader (suppl readers 120/130) receives response from the tag.
Teter et al. (US Pub 2019/0311164) discloses that an RFID portal reads multiple associated RFID tags on articles in groups moved through an RFID code reader having interrogation/charging and receiving/detection antennas concentrated on the group when in a reading zone.
Drago (US Pub 2008/0165007) discloses the use of a separate CW transmitter to power RFID tags and interrogator 904 to receive responses from the powered RFID tags (see fig. 9).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NABIL H SYED whose telephone number is (571)270-3028. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-5:00 M-F.
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, Davetta W Goins can be reached at (571) 272-2957. 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.
/NABIL H SYED/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2689
Prosecution Insights