DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Application and Response to Election/Restriction Requirement
Claims 1-15 were pending and under consideration for patentability under 37 CFR 1.104. A preliminary amendment was filed on the filing date of September 19, 2025 in which claims 15 and the specification were amended. Applicant’s preliminary amendment to both the claims and the specification have been reviewed, and are acceptable for entry.
The Examiner contacted Mr. Hames Hidetada (registration number 61,182) on August 24, 2026 to solicit a provisional election to the following restriction requirement. Applicant’s representative elected group 1 for consideration on August 26, 2026 without traverse. Restriction to one of the following inventions is required under 35 U.S.C. 121:
I. Claims 1-12, 14, and 15, drawn to a non-transitory computer readable medium, terminal, and management apparatus, classified in G06Q 30/0222.
II. Claim 13, drawn to an article supply apparatus, classified in G07F 7/00
The inventions are distinct, each from the other because of the following reasons:
Inventions I and II are directed to related medium/terminal/management apparatus and article supply apparatus. The related inventions are distinct if: (1) the inventions as claimed are either not capable of use together or can have a materially different design, mode of operation, function, or effect; (2) the inventions do not overlap in scope, i.e., are mutually exclusive; and (3) the inventions as claimed are not obvious variants. See MPEP § 806.05(j).
In the instant case, the invention I includes at least the steps of “acquires an article purchase right that enables purchase of the article and includes a benefit…acquires article supply apparatus identification information displayed on the article supply apparatus…performs, by the acquired article purchase right, settlement for the purchase of the article supplied from the article supply apparatus specified with the article supply apparatus identification information…performs control to enable the supply of the article from the article supply apparatus on condition of the settlement for the purchase of the article.” (claims 1, 12, and 14), which are not required by invention II.
Invention II includes at least “ a housing unit that houses the article; a supply unit that supplies the article housed in the housing unit; a lock unit that locks the article not to be suppliable from the supply unit; and a control unit that controls a locked state of the lock unit, wherein the control unit unlocks the lock unit on condition that the identification information has been acquired and settlement for the article has been completed by an article purchase right acquired in advance” (claim 13), which are not required by invention I.
Accordingly, the inventions as claimed have a materially different design, mode of operation, function, or effect; and they do not encompass overlapping subject matter (i.e., encompass mutually exclusive scope). Furthermore, there is nothing of record to show them to be obvious variants.
Restriction for examination purposes as indicated is proper because all these inventions listed in this action are independent or distinct for the reasons given above and there would be a serious search and/or examination burden if restriction were not required because one or more of the following reasons apply:
Each group of invention requires a different field of search and different search terms and databases because each group of invention possesses a distinct element not possessed by the other groups of invention as set forth above.
If claims are added after the election, applicant must indicate which of these claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Election was made on August 26, 2026. without traverse. Claim 13 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claims 1-12 14, and 15 are pending and currently under consideration for patentability under 37 CFR 1.104.
Priority
The instant application has a filing date of September 19, 2025. Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, or 365(c) is acknowledged. The instant application is a national phase under 35 U.S.C. 371 of PCT International Application No. PCT/JP2024/009143 (filed on March 8, 2024), which claims for the benefit of a prior-filed foreign application number 2023/046091 (JP – filed on March 22, 2023). Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on September 19, 2025 has been considered by the examiner.
Abstracts only were provided for the following foreign patent documents, and therefore only the abstracts were considered:
62-78998 (JP)
WO 2022/014594
35 U.S.C. § 112 (f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 112, sixth paragraph
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“a terminal…comprising an article purchase right acquisition unit that acquires an article purchase right that enables purchase of the article and includes a benefit” recited in claim 12.
“a terminal…comprising…an acquisition unit that acquires article supply apparatus identification information displayed on the article supply apparatus” recited in claim 12.
“a terminal…comprising…a settlement unit that performs, by the acquired article purchase right, settlement for the purchase of the article supplied from the article supply apparatus specified with the article supply apparatus identification information” recited in claim 12.
“a terminal…comprising… an article supply control unit that performs control to enable the supply of the article from the article supply apparatus based on the settlement for the purchase of the article” recited in claim 12.
“the management apparatus comprising: an article purchase right provision unit capable of providing an article purchase right including a benefit to a terminal” recited in claims 14 and 15.
“the management apparatus comprising…an acquisition unit that acquires article supply apparatus identification information obtained from the terminal” recited in claims 14 and 15.
“the management apparatus comprising…an article purchase right presentation unit capable of presenting, to the terminal, the article purchase right available for purchase of the article providable by the article supply apparatus specified with the article supply apparatus identification information” recited in claims 14 and 15.
“the management apparatus comprising…a settlement unit that performs settlement for the purchase of the article by the presented article purchase right” recited in claims 14 and 15.
“the management apparatus comprising…a provision control unit that performs control to enable the provision of the article from the article supply apparatus specified with the article supply apparatus identification information on condition that completion of the settlement” recited in claims 14 and 15.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Examiner notes the “units” recited in claims 1-11 do not invoke special interpretation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) as the generic “unit” placeholder terms in these claims are modified by sufficient structure for performing the claimed functions (e.g., a non-transitory computer readable medium having recorded thereon a program that causes a computer to perform these functions).
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.
v Claim(s) 1-12 14, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Step 1:
Claim(s) 1-11 is/are drawn to non-transitory computer readable media (i.e., a machine/manufacture), claim(s) 12 is/are drawn to a terminal (i.e., a machine/manufacture), and claim(s) 14 and 15 is/are drawn to apparatus (i.e., a machine/manufacture). As such, claims 1-12, 14, and 15 is/are drawn to one of the statutory categories of invention (Step 1: YES).
Step 2A - Prong One:
In prong one of step 2A, the claim(s) is/are analyzed to evaluate whether it/they recite(s) a judicial exception.
Claim 14 (representative of independent claim(s) 1 and 12) recites/describes the following steps;
providing an article purchase right including a benefit;
acquires article supply apparatus identification information
presenting…the article purchase right available for purchase of the article…specified with the article supply apparatus identification information;
performs settlement for the purchase of the article by the presented article purchase right; and
enable the provision of the article from the article supply apparatus specified with the article supply apparatus identification information on condition that completion of the settlement
These steps, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, describe or set-forth a process for selling an article and facilitating acquisition of the sold article. More specifically, the process comprises providing an article purchase right including a benefit; acquiring article supply apparatus identification information; presenting the article purchase right available for purchase of the article…specified with the article supply apparatus identification information; performing settlement for the purchase of the article by the presented article purchase right; and enabling the provision of the article from the article supply apparatus specified with the article supply apparatus identification information on condition that completion of the settlement, which amounts to a commercial or legal interactions (specifically, an advertising, marketing or sales activity or behavior; business relations). These limitations therefore fall within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” subject matter grouping of abstract ideas.
As such, the Examiner concludes that claim 14 recites an abstract idea (Step 2A – Prong One: YES).
Independent claim(s) 1 and 12 recite/describe nearly identical steps (and therefore also recite limitations that fall within this subject matter grouping of abstract ideas), and this/these claim(s) is/are therefore determined to recite an abstract idea under the same analysis.
Each of the depending claims likewise recite/describe these steps (by incorporation - and therefore also recite limitations that fall within this subject matter grouping of abstract ideas), and this/these claim(s) is/are therefore determined to recite an abstract idea under the same analysis. Any element(s) recited in a dependent claim that are not specifically identified/addressed by the Examiner under step 2A (prong two) or step 2B of this analysis shall be understood to be an additional part of the abstract idea recited by that particular claim. The same reasoning is similarly applicable to the limitations in the remaining dependent claims, and their respective limitations are not reproduced here for the sake of brevity.
Step 2A - Prong Two:
In prong two of step 2A, an evaluation is made whether a claim recites any additional element, or combination of additional elements, that integrate the exception into a practical application of that exception. An “addition element” is an element that is recited in the claim in addition to (beyond) the judicial exception (i.e., an element/limitation that sets forth an abstract idea is not an additional element). The phrase “integration into a practical application” is defined as requiring an additional element or a combination of additional elements in the claim to apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that it is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception.
The claim(s) recite the additional elements/limitations of
“a non-transitory computer readable medium having recorded thereon a program that enables supply of an article from an article supply apparatus capable of supplying the article, the program for causing a computer to function as an article purchase right acquisition unit that… an acquisition unit that… a settlement unit that…an article supply control unit that…” (claims 1)
“a terminal…comprising an article purchase right acquisition unit that… an acquisition unit that… a settlement unit that…an article supply control unit that…” (claims 12)
“a management apparatus…the management apparatus comprising an article purchase right acquisition unit that… an acquisition unit that… an article purchase right presentation unit capable of…a settlement unit that…an article supply control unit that…” (claim 14)
“…displayed on the article supply apparatus…from the article supply apparatus…from the article supply apparatus…” (claims 1 and 12)
“…obtained from the terminal…to the terminal…from the article supply apparatus…” (claim 14)
The requirement to execute the claimed steps/functions using “a non-transitory computer readable medium having recorded thereon a program that enables supply of an article from an article supply apparatus capable of supplying the article, the program for causing a computer to function as an article purchase right acquisition unit that… an acquisition unit that… a settlement unit that…an article supply control unit that…” (claims 1) or “a terminal…comprising an article purchase right acquisition unit that… an acquisition unit that… a settlement unit that…an article supply control unit that…” (claims 12) or “a management apparatus…the management apparatus comprising an article purchase right acquisition unit that… an acquisition unit that… an article purchase right presentation unit capable of…a settlement unit that…an article supply control unit that…” (claim 14) is equivalent to adding the words “apply it” on a generic computer and/or mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a generic computer. Applicant’s own disclosure explains that these “additional” elements may be embodied as a general-purpose computer (e.g., the as-filed specification at paragraphs [0032] “The terminal 3 is, for example, a personal computer, a tablet computer, a smartphone, a mobile phone, or the like” and [0033] “The management server 4 is a serve…”) and [0045] “connected to a communication network…the internet…”). Furthermore, the recited article supply apparatus are conventional machinery that are invoked merely as a tool to perform an existing process (i.e., vend products) and that are being used in their ordinary capacity. In other words, the claims invoke the article supply apparatus merely as tools to execute the abstract idea. This/these limitation(s) do/does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and therefore do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application (see MPEP 2106.05(f)).
The recited additional element(s) of “…displayed on the article supply apparatus…from the article supply apparatus…from the article supply apparatus…” (claims 1 and 12) and/or “…obtained from the terminal…to the terminal…from the article supply apparatus…” (claim 14) also serves merely to generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. Specifically, it/they serve(s) to limit the application of the abstract idea to computing environments, such as distributed computing environments and/or the internet, where information is represented digitally, exchanged between computers over a network, and presented using graphical user interfaces; as well as vending environments where products are sold from vending machines as opposed to human-based forms of retail/provisioning. This reasoning was demonstrated in Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Bank (Fed. Cir. 2015), where the court determined "an abstract idea does not become nonabstract by limiting the invention to a particular field of use or technological environment, such as the Internet [or] a computer"). This/these limitation(s) do/does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and therefore do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application (see MPEP 2106.05(g)).
The recited element(s) of “enable the provision of the article from the article supply apparatus specified with the article supply apparatus identification information on condition that completion of the settlement” (claim 14) and “enable the supply of the article from the article supply apparatus based on the settlement for the purchase of the article” (claims 1 and 12), even if considered to be an “additional” element for the purpose of the eligibility analysis, would simply append insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, (e.g., mere pre-solution activity, such as data gathering, in conjunction with an abstract idea; mere post-solution activity in conjunction with an abstract idea). The term “extra-solution activity” is understood as activities incidental to the primary process or product that are merely a nominal or tangential addition to the claim. The recited additional element(s) do are deemed “extra-solution” because such solution-outputting/transmission steps have long been held to be insignificant pre/post-solution activity. This/these limitation(s) do/does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and therefore do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application (see MPEP 2106.05(h) and (g)).
Furthermore, although the claims recite a specific sequence of computer-implemented functions, and although the specification suggests certain functions may be advantageous for various reasons (e.g., business reasons), the Examiner has determined that the ordered combination of claim elements (i.e., the claims as a whole) are not directed to an improvement to computer functionality/capabilities, an improvement to a computer-related technology or technological environment, and do not amount to a technology-based solution to a technology-based problem. For example, Applicant’s as-filed specification suggests that it is advantageous to implement the claimed business process because doing so can increase convenience by enabling a customer to prepay for products, can guarantee revenue for the vender even if the customer fails to receive their product, and can increase customer satisfaction and/or revenue by offering volume discounts on the sale of the vended products (see, for example, Applicant’s as-filed disclosure at paragraphs [0028] & [0068]-[0070]). These are non-technical business advantages/improvements. At most, the ordered combination of claim elements is directed to a non-technical improvement to an abstract idea itself (e.g., an improved process for selling an article and facilitating acquisition of the sold article ).
Dependent claims 2-11 and 15 fail to include any additional elements. In other words, each of the limitations/elements recited in respective dependent claims 2-11 and 15 is/are further part of the abstract idea as identified by the Examiner for each respective dependent claim (i.e. they are part of the abstract idea recited in each respective claim). For example, claim 2 recites “wherein the benefit includes at least one of a benefit of lowering a purchase price of an article or a benefit of enabling acquisition of an article for free”. This is an abstract limitation which further sets forth the abstract idea encompassed by claim 2. This limitation is not an “additional element”, and therefore it is not subject to further analysis under Step 2A- Prong Two or Step 2B. The same logic applies to each of the other dependent claims, whose limitations are not being repeated here for the sake of brevity and clarity. With respect to the other dependent claims not specifically listed here - each of the limitations/elements recited in these dependent claims other than those identified as being “additional” elements above (at the beginning of the Prong One analysis), are further part of the abstract idea encompassed by each respective dependent claim (i.e. it should be understood that these limitations are part of the abstract idea recited in each respective claim).
The Examiner has therefore determined that the additional elements, or combination of additional elements, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Accordingly, the claim(s) is/are directed to an abstract idea (Step 2A – Prong two: NO).
Step 2B:
In step 2B, the claims are analyzed to determine whether any additional element, or combination of additional elements, is/are sufficient to ensure that the claims amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. This analysis is also termed a search for an "inventive concept." An "inventive concept" is furnished by an element or combination of elements that is recited in the claim in addition to (beyond) the judicial exception, and is sufficient to ensure that the claim as a whole amounts to significantly more than the judicial exception itself. Alice Corp., 134 S. Ct. at 2355, 110 USPQ2d at 1981 (citing Mayo, 566 U.S. at 72-73, 101 USPQ2d at 1966)
As discussed above in “Step 2A – Prong 2”, the requirement to execute the claimed steps/functions using “a non-transitory computer readable medium having recorded thereon a program that enables supply of an article from an article supply apparatus capable of supplying the article, the program for causing a computer to function as an article purchase right acquisition unit that… an acquisition unit that… a settlement unit that…an article supply control unit that…” (claims 1) or “a terminal…comprising an article purchase right acquisition unit that… an acquisition unit that… a settlement unit that…an article supply control unit that…” (claims 12) or “a management apparatus…the management apparatus comprising an article purchase right acquisition unit that… an acquisition unit that… an article purchase right presentation unit capable of…a settlement unit that…an article supply control unit that…” (claim 14) is equivalent to adding the words “apply it” on a generic computer and/or mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a generic computer. Furthermore, the recited article supply apparatus are conventional machinery that are invoked merely as a tool to perform an existing process (i.e., vend products) and that are being used in their ordinary capacity. These limitations therefore do not qualify as “significantly more” (see MPEP 2106.05(f)).
As discussed above in “Step 2A – Prong 2”, the recited additional element(s) of “…displayed on the article supply apparatus…from the article supply apparatus…from the article supply apparatus…” (claims 1 and 12) and/or “…obtained from the terminal…to the terminal…from the article supply apparatus…” (claim 14) serves merely to generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. These limitations therefore do not qualify as “significantly more” (see MPEP 2106.05(g)).
As discussed above in “Step 2A – Prong 2”, the recited element(s) of “enable the provision of the article from the article supply apparatus specified with the article supply apparatus identification information on condition that completion of the settlement” (claim 14) and “enable the supply of the article from the article supply apparatus based on the settlement for the purchase of the article” (claims 1 and 12), even if considered to be an “additional” element for the purpose of the eligibility analysis, would simply append insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, (e.g., mere pre-solution activity, such as data gathering, in conjunction with an abstract idea; mere post-solution activity in conjunction with an abstract idea). These additional element(s), taken individually or in combination, additionally amount to well-understood, routine and conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality, appended to the judicial exception. These additional elements, taken individually or in combination, are well-understood, routine and conventional to those in the field of product vending using vending machines. These limitations therefore do not qualify as “significantly more”. (see MPEP 2106.05(d)). This conclusion is based on a factual determination. Examiner takes Official Notice that these steps were well-understood, routine, and conventional at the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Furthermore, the lack of technical detail/description in Applicant’s own specification provides implicit evidence that these steps were well-understood, routine, and conventional. Viewing the additional limitations in combination also shows that they fail to ensure the claims amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. When considered as an ordered combination, the additional components of the claims add nothing that is not already present when considered separately, and thus simply append the abstract idea with words equivalent to “apply it” on a generic computer and/or mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a generic computer, generally link the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use, append the abstract idea with insignificant extra solution activity associated with the implementation of the judicial exception, (e.g., mere data gathering, post-solution activity), and appended with well-understood, routine and conventional activities previously known to the industry.
Dependent claims 2-11 and 15 fail to include any additional elements. In other words, each of the limitations/elements recited in respective dependent claims 2-11 and 15 is/are further part of the abstract idea as identified by the Examiner for each respective dependent claim (i.e. they are part of the abstract idea identified by the Examiner to which each respective claim is directed).
The Examiner has therefore determined that no additional element, or combination of additional claims elements is/are sufficient to ensure the claim(s) amount to significantly more than the abstract idea identified above (Step 2B: NO).
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 of this title, 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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
v Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramatchandirane et al. (U.S. PG Pub No. 2015/0278810, October 1, 2015 - hereinafter "Ramatchandirane”) in view of Tedesco et al. (U.S. Patent No. 5,988,346, November 23, 1999 - hereinafter "Tedesco”)
With respect to claims 1 and 12, Ramatchandirane teaches a non-transitory computer readable medium having recorded thereon a program that enables supply of an article from an article supply apparatus capable of supplying the article, the program for causing a computer to function as (claim 1 – [0005] “mobile devices, such as smart phones”, see also [0105]-[0106] “server or plurality of servers…storage device…instructions” where certain embodiments readable on server) and a terminal that enable supply of an article from an article supply apparatus capable of supplying the article (claim 12 - [0005] “mobile devices, such as smart phones” mobile phone is one such terminal & [0105]-[0106] “server or plurality of servers…storage device…instructions” where certain embodiments readable on server being the terminal); comprising:
an article purchase right acquisition unit that acquires an article purchase right that enables purchase of the article ([0008] “The transaction can be authorized in the trusted cloud, using payment and other information associated with the user and information associated with the vending machine. If the transaction is authorized, then the product desired by the user can be dispensed, or made enabled to be dispensed by an action of the user.” – trusted cloud is the article purchase right acquisition unit that provides a right to the user to purchase the product based on ensuring the payment is validated/authorized/sufficient , [0040] “The trusted cloud 102 can include a transaction processing system 166, for example, to complete the single transmission initiated transaction 151. For example, as will be described in detail below, the transaction processing system 166 can use existing information available to (or accessible by) the trusted cloud 102, such as payment information for the user 101 and information registered for the connected machine 152. Authorization that occurs in the web domain 156 includes verifying that the user 101 is registered with the trusted cloud 102 and that other conditions of the single transmission initiated transaction 151 are in place (e.g., including user-specified payment methods)…”, see also [0046]-[0047] & [0050]-[0051] & [0067]-[0069] & [0071] for payment right acquisition)
an acquisition unit that acquires article supply apparatus identification information displayed on the article supply apparatus; ([0008] “A transaction with a registered vending machine, for example, can be initiated when the user captures (e.g., scans, enters, records) information, e.g., a Quick Response (QR) code, a bar code, an image, a text code…Information associated with the transaction can be sent to the trusted cloud, including information identifying the user (and/or the user device), the vending machine, and the product to be purchased...”, [0042] “trusted cloud 102 can process transaction requests received from the user device 106. Information in a transaction request, for example, can include a product identifier, a merchant identifier, a machine identifier, a user identifier, a user device identifier, an amount, and/or other transaction information.” – trusted cloud is the acquisition unit and it acquires a terminal/machine identifier as determined from a scanned QR code using the customer’s mobile device, [0071] “upon the user scanning a QR code…identifying a product or…specific connected machine), the user device 106 can send a single transmission initiated request…the user ID…”, see also [0082]-[0084])
a settlement unit that performs, by the acquired article purchase right, settlement for the purchase of the article supplied from the article supply apparatus specified with the article supply apparatus identification information; and ([0008] “The transaction can be authorized in the trusted cloud, using payment and other information associated with the user and information associated with the vending machine. If the transaction is authorized, then the product desired by the user can be dispensed, or made enabled to be dispensed by an action of the user.” – trusted cloud is the settlement unit that performs settlement for the purchase of the purchase of the article supplied from the article supply apparatus specified with the article supply apparatus identification information, [0040] “The trusted cloud 102 can include a transaction processing system 166, for example, to complete the single transmission initiated transaction 151. For example, as will be described in detail below, the transaction processing system 166 can use existing information available to (or accessible by) the trusted cloud 102, such as payment information for the user 101 and information registered for the connected machine 152. Authorization that occurs in the web domain 156 includes verifying that the user 101 is registered with the trusted cloud 102 and that other conditions of the single transmission initiated transaction 151 are in place (e.g., including user-specified payment methods)…”, see also [0046]-[0047] & [0050]-[0051] & [0067]-[0069] & [0071] for payment settlement based)
an article supply control unit that performs control to enable the supply of the article from the article supply apparatus based on the settlement for the purchase of the article ([0008] “If the transaction is authorized, then the product desired by the user can be dispensed…”, [0040] “If the transaction is authorized by the transaction processing system 166, for example, then the trusted cloud 102 can send a message 168 to the connected machine 152, e.g., to complete the transaction. For example, if the connected machine 152 is a snack vending machine, then the message 168 can be a message for the vending machine to release (or dispense) the snack chosen by the user 101…”, see also [0047] & [0066] & [0092] for sending instruction from the trusted cloud 102 (i.e., article supply control unit) to dispense the product based on the settlement being approved)
Although Ramatchandirane suggests the system may enable integration with pre-payment actions/settlements and/or prepaid purchase rights afforded the customer by other parties ([0050]-[0051] “applying…pre-payment actions associated with the transaction…loyalty-member services…privileged access to services…”, [0070] “coupons/incentive…pre-loaded coupons”), the details of such prepaid purchases rights are not elaborated upon. For example, Ramatchandirane does not appear to disclose prepaid purchase rights that include and/or provide a benefit to the customer (e.g., discount). Ramatchandirane does not appear to disclose,
an article purchase right acquisition unit that acquires an article purchase right that enables purchase of the article and includes a benefit;
However, Tedesco discloses
an article purchase right acquisition unit that acquires an article purchase right that enables purchase of the article and includes a benefit (Figs 3A & 3B & 4 & 7:5-53 “receiving a request to purchase a subscription…includes an identification of the subscription option to be purchased…verifies the request to purchase the subscription. The step of verifying the request to purchase the subscription may include a number of sub-steps, including validating that the received subscription identifier matches a subscription identifier stored in field 410 of subscription option table 400, that the received payment is sufficient to purchase the identified subscription...After verifying the validity of the subscription request, CPU 126 generates a redemption code associated with the subscription, as shown by step 718. The generated redemption code could be a personal identification number ("PIN") received from the customer, a number determined by CPU 126 according to registration process instructions, the customer's credit card number, or any other unique identification code. At step 719, CPU 126 calculates the subscription expiration date using the current system date/time and the subscription duration stored in field 416 of the subscription option table record associated with the selected subscription. It should be understood that although a single expiration date is illustrated, a subscription may have multiple expiration dates, such as an expiration date for each item to be redeemed. At step 720, the subscription status field 520 is populated to indicate a status of "active." At step 721, subscription registration data, preferably including the generated redemption code, a product identifier, a quantity remaining, a subscription start date and a subscription expiration date, is stored in storage device 134. Finally, the subscription registration process concludes with step 722 in which the generated redemption code is output to the subscriber…” – the system enables customers to acquire an article purchase right (i.e., a subscription itself and/or the associated redemption code) which enables the customer to receive/purchase multiple articles from vending machines at a discounted price (i.e., an article purchase right that enables purchase of the article and includes a benefit).)
Tedesco suggests it is advantageous to include article purchase right acquisition unit that acquires an article purchase right that enables purchase of the article and includes a benefit, because doing so can provide assurance to vending machine operators that customers will acquire products from their machines, can foster vending machine loyalty, can provide more constant sales, can increase customer satisfaction by providing volume discounts, and can enable cash-free acquisition of products at vending machines after the article purchase right has been acquired (1:40-52 & 2:15-20 & 8:28-33).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the medium and terminal of Ramatchandirane to include article purchase right acquisition unit that acquires an article purchase right that enables purchase of the article and includes a benefit, as taught by Tedesco, because doing so can provide assurance to vending machine operators that customers will acquire products from their machines, can foster vending machine loyalty, can provide more constant sales, can increase customer satisfaction by providing volume discounts, and can enable cash-free acquisition of products at vending machines after the article purchase right has been acquired.
Furthermore, since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself. That is in the substitution of the pre-paid purchase right of Tedesco (i.e., an article purchase right acquisition unit that acquires an article purchase right that enables purchase of the article and includes a benefit) for the unspecified pre-payment right of Ramatchandirane. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
With respect to claim 2, Ramatchandirane and Tadesco teach the medium of claim 1. Ramatchandirane does not appear to disclose,
wherein the benefit includes at least one of a benefit of lowering a purchase price of an article or a benefit of enabling acquisition of an article for free;
However, Tedesco discloses
wherein the benefit includes at least one of a benefit of lowering a purchase price of an article or a benefit of enabling acquisition of an article for free (Figs 3A & 3B & 4 show the user earns a lower purchase price of each article as the benefit of the prepaid subscription and associated redemption code (i.e., the article purchase right), 6:1-4 “would emphasise the per unit discount for purchasing in bulk…”)
Tedesco suggests it is advantageous to include wherein the benefit includes at least one of a benefit of lowering a purchase price of an article or a benefit of enabling acquisition of an article for free, because doing so can foster vending machine loyalty, and can provide more constant sales, can increase customer satisfaction by providing volume discounts (1:40-52 & 2:15-20 & 8:28-33).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the medium and terminal of Ramatchandirane to include wherein the benefit includes at least one of a benefit of lowering a purchase price of an article or a benefit of enabling acquisition of an article for free, as taught by Tedesco, because doing so can foster vending machine loyalty, and can provide more constant sales, can increase customer satisfaction by providing volume discounts.
Furthermore, since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself. That is in the substitution of the pre-paid purchase right of Tedesco (i.e., wherein the benefit includes at least one of a benefit of lowering a purchase price of an article or a benefit of enabling acquisition of an article for free) for the unspecified pre-payment right of Ramatchandirane. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
With respect to claim 3, Ramatchandirane teaches the medium of claim 1;
wherein the settlement for the purchase of the article by the article purchase right is electronic payment and does not include cash payment ([0040] “The trusted cloud 102 can include a transaction processing system 166, for example, to complete the single transmission initiated transaction 151. For example, as will be described in detail below, the transaction processing system 166 can use existing information available to (or accessible by) the trusted cloud 102, such as payment information for the user 101 and information registered for the connected machine 152. Authorization that occurs in the web domain 156 includes verifying that the user 101 is registered with the trusted cloud 102 and that other conditions of the single transmission initiated transaction 151 are in place (e.g., including user-specified payment methods)…” – therefore for the settlement does not use cash and uses electronic payment, [0050]-[0051] “applying…pre-payment actions associated with the transaction…loyalty-member services…privileged access to services…”, [0070] “coupons/incentive…pre-loaded coupons”), see also [0046]-[0047] & [0050]-[0051] & [0067]-[0069] & [0071] for payment settlement based)
Examiner notes that the combination with Tedesco also discloses this feature because in Tedesco the user receives a prepaid redemption code associated with their subscription and they use this code when subsequently acquiring an article supplied from a vending machine and the code is used to perform the payment settlement and therefore the settlement does not include cash payment.
With respect to claim 4, Ramatchandirane and Tadesco teach the medium of claim 3. Ramatchandirane does not appear to disclose,
wherein the article purchase right acquisition unit is capable of acquiring a plurality of first-type article purchase rights;
However, Tedesco discloses
wherein the article purchase right acquisition unit is capable of acquiring a plurality of first-type article purchase rights (Figs 3A & 4 show that a plurality of first-type article purchase rights (e.g., 1 week subscription for any product, 2 week subscription to any product, 3 week subscription to any product) are capable of being acquired)
Tedesco suggests it is advantageous to include wherein the article purchase right acquisition unit is capable of acquiring a plurality of first-type article purchase rights, because doing so can foster vending machine loyalty, and can provide more constant sales, can increase customer satisfaction by providing volume discounts (1:40-52 & 2:15-20 & 8:28-33).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the medium and terminal of Ramatchandirane to include wherein the article purchase right acquisition unit is capable of acquiring a plurality of first-type article purchase rights, as taught by Tedesco, because doing so can foster vending machine loyalty, and can provide more constant sales, can increase customer satisfaction by providing volume discounts.
Furthermore, since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself. That is in the substitution of the pre-paid purchase right of Tedesco (i.e., wherein the article purchase right acquisition unit is capable of acquiring a plurality of first-type article purchase rights) for the unspecified pre-payment right of Ramatchandirane. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
With respect to claim 5, Ramatchandirane and Tadesco teach the medium of claim 4. Ramatchandirane does not appear to disclose,
wherein the first-type article purchase right includes a plurality of second-type article purchase rights, and a type of the first-type article purchase right varies depending on a number of the included second-type article purchase rights
However, Tedesco discloses
wherein the first-type article purchase right includes a plurality of second-type article purchase rights, and a type of the first-type article purchase right varies depending on a number of the included second-type article purchase rights (Figs 3A & 4 show that the plurality of first-type article purchase rights (e.g., 1 week subscription for any product, 2 week subscription to any product, 3 week subscription to any product) are capable of being acquired) include a plurality of second-type article purchase rights (e.g., any six items, any 14 items, any 22 items) and a type of the first-type article purchase right varies depending on a number of the included second-type article purchase rights (e.g., a 1 week subscription has 6 items whereas a 3 week subscription has 22 items)
Tedesco suggests it is advantageous to include wherein the first-type article purchase right includes a plurality of second-type article purchase rights, and a type of the first-type article purchase right varies depending on a number of the included second-type article purchase rights, because doing so can foster vending machine loyalty, and can provide more constant sales, can increase customer satisfaction by providing volume discounts (1:40-52 & 2:15-20 & 8:28-33).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the medium and terminal of Ramatchandirane to include wherein the article purchase right acquisition unit is capable of acquiring a plurality of first-type article purchase rights, as taught by Tedesco, because doing so can foster vending machine loyalty, and can provide more constant sales, can increase customer satisfaction by providing volume discounts.
Furthermore, since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself. That is in the substitution of the pre-paid purchase right of Tedesco (i.e., wherein the first-type article purchase right includes a plurality of second-type article purchase rights, and a type of the first-type article purchase right varies depending on a number of the included second-type article purchase rights) for the unspecified pre-payment right of Ramatchandirane. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
With respect to claim 6, Ramatchandirane and Tadesco teach the medium of claim 5. Ramatchandirane does not appear to disclose,
wherein the first-type article purchase right is acquired at a higher price as the number of included second-type article purchase rights is larger
However, Tedesco discloses
wherein the first-type article purchase right is acquired at a higher price as the number of included second-type article purchase rights is larger (Figs 3A & 4 show that a first-type article purchase rights (e.g., 3 week subscription to any product) is acquired at a higher price as the number of second-type article purchase prights is larged (e.g., 22 items is larger than 6 items and the 3 week subscitpion is more expensive accordingly))
Tedesco suggests it is advantageous to include wherein the first-type article purchase right is acquired at a higher price as the number of included second-type article purchase rights is larger, because doing so can foster vending machine loyalty, and can provide more constant sales, can increase customer satisfaction by providing volume discounts (1:40-52 & 2:15-20 & 8:28-33).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the medium and terminal of Ramatchandirane to include wherein the first-type article purchase right is acquired at a higher price as the number of included second-type article purchase rights is larger, as taught by Tedesco, because doing so can foster vending machine loyalty, and can provide more constant sales, can increase customer satisfaction by providing volume discounts.
Furthermore, since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself. That is in the substitution of the pre-paid purchase right of Tedesco (i.e., wherein the first-type article purchase right is acquired at a higher price as the number of included second-type article purchase rights is larger) for the unspecified pre-payment right of Ramatchandirane. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
With respect to claim 7, Ramatchandirane and Tadesco teach the medium of claim 5. Ramatchandirane does not appear to disclose,
wherein the settlement unit disables use of the used second-type article purchase right by settlement for the purchase of the article by the second-type article purchase right
However, Tedesco discloses
wherein the settlement unit disables use of the used second-type article purchase right by settlement for the purchase of the article by the second-type article purchase right (Fig 5 shows that when settlement for the purchase of the article by the second-type article purchase right is completed (i.e., the user acquires one of their prepaid products using their subscription code) the system reduces the quantity remaining amount which essentially disables use of a used second-type article purchase right, 8:58-62 “reflects redemption…decrements the value stored in quantity remaining…”)
Tedesco suggests it is advantageous to include wherein the settlement unit disables use of the used second-type article purchase right by settlement for the purchase of the article by the second-type article purchase right, because so ensures the user only receives the quantity of product(s) they have prepaid for (Fig 5 & 8:58-62).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the medium and terminal of Ramatchandirane to include wherein the settlement unit disables use of the used second-type article purchase right by settlement for the purchase of the article by the second-type article purchase right, as taught by Tedesco, because so ensures the user only receives the quantity of product(s) they have prepaid for.
With respect to claim 8, Ramatchandirane and Tadesco teach the medium of claim 5. Ramatchandirane does not appear to disclose,
wherein the plurality of types of the first-type article purchase rights includes the same benefit
However, Tedesco discloses
wherein the plurality of types of the first-type article purchase rights includes the same benefit (Figs 3A & 4 show that the plurality of types of first-type article purchase rights (e.g., 1 week subscription, 3 week subscription) includes the same benefit (e.g., same product and both involve a discounted price))
Tedesco suggests it is advantageous to include wherein the plurality of types of the first-type article purchase rights includes the same benefit, because doing so can foster vending machine loyalty, and can provide more constant sales, can increase customer satisfaction by providing volume discounts (1:40-52 & 2:15-20 & 8:28-33).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the medium and terminal of Ramatchandirane to include wherein the plurality of types of the first-type article purchase rights includes the same benefit, as taught by Tedesco, because doing so can foster vending machine loyalty, and can provide more constant sales, can increase customer satisfaction by providing volume discounts.
Furthermore, since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself. That is in the substitution of the pre-paid purchase right of Tedesco (i.e., wherein the plurality of types of the first-type article purchase rights includes the same benefit) for the unspecified pre-payment right of Ramatchandirane. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
With respect to claim 9, Ramatchandirane and Tadesco teach the medium of claim 5. Ramatchandirane does not appear to disclose,
wherein the settlement unit controls the benefit so as to be available on condition that all settlements of the second-type article purchase rights are completed
However, Tedesco discloses
wherein the settlement unit controls the benefit so as to be available on condition that all settlements of the second-type article purchase rights are completed (7:5-53 “receiving a request to purchase a subscription…includes an identification of the subscription option to be purchased…verifies the request to purchase the subscription. The step of verifying the request to purchase the subscription may include a number of sub-steps, including validating that the received subscription identifier matches a subscription identifier stored in field 410 of subscription option table 400, that the received payment is sufficient to purchase the identified subscription...After verifying the validity of the subscription request, CPU 126 generates a redemption code associated with the subscription, as shown by step 718. The generated redemption code could be a personal identification number ("PIN") received from the customer, a number determined by CPU 126 according to registration process instructions, the customer's credit card number, or any other unique identification code. At step 719, CPU 126 calculates the subscription expiration date using the current system date/time and the subscription duration stored in field 416 of the subscription option table record associated with the selected subscription. It should be understood that although a single expiration date is illustrated, a subscription may have multiple expiration dates, such as an expiration date for each item to be redeemed. At step 720, the subscription status field 520 is populated to indicate a status of "active." At step 721, subscription registration data, preferably including the generated redemption code, a product identifier, a quantity remaining, a subscription start date and a subscription expiration date, is stored in storage device 134. Finally, the subscription registration process concludes with step 722 in which the generated redemption code is output to the subscriber…” – the benefit (i.e., discounted price product redemptions) is added to the database upon settlement of the purchase for all of the second-type article purchase rights is completed (i.e., after the user pays the price for, for example, the 22 discounted items associated with the 3 week subscription for $15)
Tedesco suggests it is advantageous to include wherein the settlement unit controls the benefit so as to be available on condition that all settlements of the second-type article purchase rights are completed, because doing so can foster vending machine loyalty, and can provide more constant sales, can increase customer satisfaction by providing volume discounts (1:40-52 & 2:15-20 & 8:28-33).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the medium and terminal of Ramatchandirane to include wherein the settlement unit controls the benefit so as to be available on condition that all settlements of the second-type article purchase rights are completed, as taught by Tedesco, because doing so can foster vending machine loyalty, and can provide more constant sales, can increase customer satisfaction by providing volume discounts.
Furthermore, since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself. That is in the substitution of the pre-paid purchase right of Tedesco (i.e., wherein the settlement unit controls the benefit so as to be available on condition that all settlements of the second-type article purchase rights are completed) for the unspecified pre-payment right of Ramatchandirane. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
With respect to claim 10, Ramatchandirane and Tadesco teach the medium of claim 2. Ramatchandirane does not appear to disclose,
wherein a first price is set for the second-type article purchase right, and the benefit of enabling acquisition of an article for free is a benefit of enabling acquisition of one article of the first price or less
However, Tedesco discloses
wherein a first price is set for the second-type article purchase right, and the benefit of enabling acquisition of an article for free is a benefit of enabling acquisition of one article of the first price or less (Fig 3A shows a first price is set for the second-type article purchase right (e.g., $5 for 6 items which is .833 cents per item) – Examiner notes the description of the benefit of enabling acquisition of an article for free as being a benefit of enabling acquisition of one article of the first price or less merits no patentable weight as claim 2 only requires the benefit to be one of a benefit of lowering a purchase price of an article or a benefit of enabling acquisition of an article for free)
Tedesco suggests it is advantageous to include wherein a first price is set for the second-type article purchase right, and the benefit of enabling acquisition of an article for free is a benefit of enabling acquisition of one article of the first price or less, because doing so can foster vending machine loyalty, and can provide more constant sales, can increase customer satisfaction by providing volume discounts (1:40-52 & 2:15-20 & 8:28-33).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the medium and terminal of Ramatchandirane to include wherein a first price is set for the second-type article purchase right, and the benefit of enabling acquisition of an article for free is a benefit of enabling acquisition of one article of the first price or less, as taught by Tedesco, because doing so can foster vending machine loyalty, and can provide more constant sales, can increase customer satisfaction by providing volume discounts.
Furthermore, since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself. That is in the substitution of the pre-paid purchase right of Tedesco (i.e., wherein a first price is set for the second-type article purchase right, and the benefit of enabling acquisition of an article for free is a benefit of enabling acquisition of one article of the first price or less) for the unspecified pre-payment right of Ramatchandirane. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
With respect to claim 11, Ramatchandirane and Tadesco teach the medium of claim 4. Ramatchandirane does not appear to disclose,
wherein the settlement unit controls the first-type article purchase right to be settleable only within a certain period from an acquisition date
However, Tedesco discloses
wherein the settlement unit controls the first-type article purchase right to be settleable only within a certain period from an acquisition date (Fig 3B shows expiration date of the first-type article purchase right, see also Fig 5 tag 516)
Tedesco suggests it is advantageous to include wherein the settlement unit controls the first-type article purchase right to be settleable only within a certain period from an acquisition date, because doing so can provide more constant sales (1:40-52 & 2:15-20 & 8:28-33).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the medium and terminal of Ramatchandirane to include wherein the settlement unit controls the first-type article purchase right to be settleable only within a certain period from an acquisition date, as taught by Tedesco, because doing so can provide more constant sales.
Furthermore, since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself. That is in the substitution of the pre-paid purchase right of Tedesco (i.e., wherein the settlement unit controls the first-type article purchase right to be settleable only within a certain period from an acquisition date) for the unspecified pre-payment right of Ramatchandirane. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
v Claims 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramatchandirane et al. (U.S. PG Pub No. 2015/0278810, October 1, 2015 - hereinafter "Ramatchandirane”) in view of Shturma et al. (U.S. PG Pub. No. 2022/0012975 January 13, 2022 - hereinafter "Shturma”) in view of Tedesco et al. (U.S. Patent No. 5,988,346, November 23, 1999 - hereinafter "Tedesco”)
With respect to claim 14, Ramatchandirane teaches a management apparatus that manages an article supply apparatus capable of supplying an article ([0105]-[0106] “server or plurality of servers…storage device…instructions”);, the management apparatus comprising:
an article purchase right provision unit capable of providing an article purchase right including to a terminal; ([0008] “The transaction can be authorized in the trusted cloud, using payment and other information associated with the user and information associated with the vending machine. If the transaction is authorized, then the product desired by the user can be dispensed, or made enabled to be dispensed by an action of the user.” – trusted cloud is the article purchase right acquisition unit that provides a right to the user to purchase the product based on ensuring the payment is validated/authorized/sufficient , [0040] “The trusted cloud 102 can include a transaction processing system 166, for example, to complete the single transmission initiated transaction 151. For example, as will be described in detail below, the transaction processing system 166 can use existing information available to (or accessible by) the trusted cloud 102, such as payment information for the user 101 and information registered for the connected machine 152. Authorization that occurs in the web domain 156 includes verifying that the user 101 is registered with the trusted cloud 102 and that other conditions of the single transmission initiated transaction 151 are in place (e.g., including user-specified payment methods)…”, see also [0046]-[0047] & [0050]-[0051] & [0067]-[0069] & [0071] for payment right acquisition)
an acquisition unit that acquires article supply apparatus identification information obtained from the terminal; ([0008] “A transaction with a registered vending machine, for example, can be initiated when the user captures (e.g., scans, enters, records) information, e.g., a Quick Response (QR) code, a bar code, an image, a text code…Information associated with the transaction can be sent to the trusted cloud, including information identifying the user (and/or the user device), the vending machine, and the product to be purchased...”, [0042] “trusted cloud 102 can process transaction requests received from the user device 106. Information in a transaction request, for example, can include a product identifier, a merchant identifier, a machine identifier, a user identifier, a user device identifier, an amount, and/or other transaction information.” – trusted cloud is the acquisition unit and it acquires a terminal/machine identifier as determined from a scanned QR code using the customer’s mobile device, [0071] “upon the user scanning a QR code…identifying a product or…specific connected machine), the user device 106 can send a single transmission initiated request…the user ID…”, see also [0082]-[0084])
a settlement unit that performs settlement for the purchase of the article by the presented article purchase right; and ([0008] “The transaction can be authorized in the trusted cloud, using payment and other information associated with the user and information associated with the vending machine. If the transaction is authorized, then the product desired by the user can be dispensed, or made enabled to be dispensed by an action of the user.” – trusted cloud is the settlement unit that performs settlement for the purchase of the purchase of the article supplied from the article supply apparatus specified with the article supply apparatus identification information, [0040] “The trusted cloud 102 can include a transaction processing system 166, for example, to complete the single transmission initiated transaction 151. For example, as will be described in detail below, the transaction processing system 166 can use existing information available to (or accessible by) the trusted cloud 102, such as payment information for the user 101 and information registered for the connected machine 152. Authorization that occurs in the web domain 156 includes verifying that the user 101 is registered with the trusted cloud 102 and that other conditions of the single transmission initiated transaction 151 are in place (e.g., including user-specified payment methods)…”, see also [0046]-[0047] & [0050]-[0051] & [0067]-[0069] & [0071] for payment settlement based)
a provision control unit that performs control to enable the provision of the article from the article supply apparatus specified with the article supply apparatus identification information on condition that completion of the settlement ([0008] “If the transaction is authorized, then the product desired by the user can be dispensed…”, [0040] “If the transaction is authorized by the transaction processing system 166, for example, then the trusted cloud 102 can send a message 168 to the connected machine 152, e.g., to complete the transaction. For example, if the connected machine 152 is a snack vending machine, then the message 168 can be a message for the vending machine to release (or dispense) the snack chosen by the user 101…”, see also [0047] & [0066] & [0092] for sending instruction from the trusted cloud 102 (i.e., article supply control unit) to dispense the product based on the settlement being approved)
Ramatchandirane does not appear to disclose,
an article purchase right acquisition unit that acquires an article purchase right that enables purchase of the article and includes a benefit;
an article purchase right presentation unit capable of presenting, to the terminal, the article purchase right available for purchase of the article providable by the article supply apparatus specified with the article supply apparatus identification information;
However, Shturma discloses
an article purchase right presentation unit capable of presenting, to the terminal, the article purchase right available for purchase of the article providable by the article supply apparatus specified with the article supply apparatus identification information ([0030] “user…manually scans a QR code 123 from tag…with a camera in or associated with their mobile electronic device. The mobile electronic device requests a web page or display data 124 unique to the vending machine from a server 111, such as over a network connection 121. User 100 interacts with the display data 124 to learn about the inventoried products and select a product to vend. After the user 100 selects a product, the server 111 receives a product request from the mobile electronic device 117. The server 111 then requests the checkout from a payment gateway 115, such as over a network connection 116. The server 111 facilitates redirection of the mobile electronic device 117 to a checkout interface provided by the payment gateway 115, such as over a network connection 122.”)
Shturma suggests it is advantageous to include an article purchase right presentation unit capable of presenting, to the terminal, the article purchase right available for purchase of the article providable by the article supply apparatus specified with the article supply apparatus identification information, because doing can provide an efficient and effective mechanism to enable customers to see the available article purchase rights for purchase for that particular vending machine and make a selection ([0030]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Ramatchandirane to include an article purchase right presentation unit capable of presenting, to the terminal, the article purchase right available for purchase of the article providable by the article supply apparatus specified with the article supply apparatus identification information, as taught by Tedesco, because doing can provide an efficient and effective mechanism to enable customers to see the available article purchase rights for purchase for that particular vending machine and make a selection.
Although Ramatchandirane suggests the system may enable integration with pre-payment actions/settlements and/or prepaid purchase rights afforded the customer by other parties ([0050]-[0051] “applying…pre-payment actions associated with the transaction…loyalty-member services…privileged access to services…”, [0070] “coupons/incentive…pre-loaded coupons”), the details of such prepaid purchases rights are not elaborated upon. For example, Ramatchandirane does not appear to disclose prepaid purchase rights that include and/or provide a benefit to the customer (e.g., discount). Ramatchandirane does not appear to disclose,
an article purchase right acquisition unit that acquires an article purchase right that enables purchase of the article and includes a benefit;
However, Tedesco discloses
an article purchase right acquisition unit that acquires an article purchase right that enables purchase of the article and includes a benefit (Figs 3A & 3B & 4 & 7:5-53 “receiving a request to purchase a subscription…includes an identification of the subscription option to be purchased…verifies the request to purchase the subscription. The step of verifying the request to purchase the subscription may include a number of sub-steps, including validating that the received subscription identifier matches a subscription identifier stored in field 410 of subscription option table 400, that the received payment is sufficient to purchase the identified subscription...After verifying the validity of the subscription request, CPU 126 generates a redemption code associated with the subscription, as shown by step 718. The generated redemption code could be a personal identification number ("PIN") received from the customer, a number determined by CPU 126 according to registration process instructions, the customer's credit card number, or any other unique identification code. At step 719, CPU 126 calculates the subscription expiration date using the current system date/time and the subscription duration stored in field 416 of the subscription option table record associated with the selected subscription. It should be understood that although a single expiration date is illustrated, a subscription may have multiple expiration dates, such as an expiration date for each item to be redeemed. At step 720, the subscription status field 520 is populated to indicate a status of "active." At step 721, subscription registration data, preferably including the generated redemption code, a product identifier, a quantity remaining, a subscription start date and a subscription expiration date, is stored in storage device 134. Finally, the subscription registration process concludes with step 722 in which the generated redemption code is output to the subscriber…” – the system enables customers to acquire an article purchase right (i.e., a subscription itself and/or the associated redemption code) which enables the customer to receive/purchase multiple articles from vending machines at a discounted price (i.e., an article purchase right that enables purchase of the article and includes a benefit).)
Tedesco suggests it is advantageous to include article purchase right acquisition unit that acquires an article purchase right that enables purchase of the article and includes a benefit, because doing so can provide assurance to vending machine operators that customers will acquire products from their machines, can foster vending machine loyalty, can provide more constant sales, can increase customer satisfaction by providing volume discounts, and can enable cash-free acquisition of products at vending machines after the article purchase right has been acquired (1:40-52 & 2:15-20 & 8:28-33).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Ramatchandirane in view of Shturma to include article purchase right acquisition unit that acquires an article purchase right that enables purchase of the article and includes a benefit, as taught by Tedesco, because doing so can provide assurance to vending machine operators that customers will acquire products from their machines, can foster vending machine loyalty, can provide more constant sales, can increase customer satisfaction by providing volume discounts, and can enable cash-free acquisition of products at vending machines after the article purchase right has been acquired.
Furthermore, since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself. That is in the substitution of the pre-paid purchase right of Tedesco (i.e., an article purchase right acquisition unit that acquires an article purchase right that enables purchase of the article and includes a benefit) for the unspecified pre-payment right of Ramatchandirane. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
v Claims 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramatchandirane in view of Shturma in view of Tedesco, as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Sellers et al. (U.S. PG Pub No. 2021/0065149 , March 4, 2021- hereinafter "Sellers”)
With respect to claim 15, Ramatchandirane, Shturma, and Tadesco teach the management apparatus of claim 14. Ramatchandirane does not appear to disclose,
wherein the article purchase right includes a plurality of the article purchase rights and the benefit of enabling acquisition of an article for free, and
the settlement unit performs settlement for the acquisition of the article by the article purchase right and the benefit by electronic payment
However, Tedesco discloses
the settlement unit performs settlement for the acquisition of the article by the article purchase right and the benefit by electronic payment (Figs 3A & 3B & 4 & 7:5-53 the system uses the purchase right (redemption code) to settle acquisition of the product and the user realizes the benefit (e.g., prepaid discounted price) and which was made by electronic payment – furthermore redemption using the redemption code electronically amounts to electronic payment)
Tedesco suggests it is advantageous to include wherein settlement unit performs settlement for the acquisition of the article by the article purchase right and the benefit by electronic payment, because doing so can provide assurance to vending machine operators that customers will acquire products from their machines, can foster vending machine loyalty, can provide more constant sales, can increase customer satisfaction by providing volume discounts, and can enable cash-free acquisition of products at vending machines after the article purchase right has been acquired (1:40-52 & 2:15-20 & 8:28-33).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Ramatchandirane to include wherein settlement unit performs settlement for the acquisition of the article by the article purchase right and the benefit by electronic payment, as taught by Tedesco, because doing so can provide assurance to vending machine operators that customers will acquire products from their machines, can foster vending machine loyalty, can provide more constant sales, can increase customer satisfaction by providing volume discounts, and can enable cash-free acquisition of products at vending machines after the article purchase right has been acquired (1:40-52 & 2:15-20 & 8:28-33).
Furthermore, since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself. That is in the substitution of the pre-paid purchase right of Tedesco (i.e., wherein settlement unit performs settlement for the acquisition of the article by the article purchase right and the benefit by electronic payment) for the unspecified pre-payment right of Ramatchandirane. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
Ramatchandirane, Shturma, and Tadesco do not appear to disclose,
wherein the article purchase right includes a plurality of the article purchase rights and the benefit of enabling acquisition of an article for free
However, Sellers discloses
wherein the article purchase right includes a plurality of the article purchase rights and the benefit of enabling acquisition of an article for free ([0029] buy one get one free volume discount on vending machine purchase is a plurality of purchase rights and the benefit enables acquisition of an article for free, see also [0017])
Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself. That is in the substitution of the pre-paid purchase right of Sellers (i.e., BOGO) for the unspecified pre-payment right of Ramatchandirane. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
Prior Art of Record
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure.
Walker et al. (U.S. PG Pub No. 2006/0282323, December 14, 2006) teaches a vending machine system where users can pre-purchase products for various volume discounts.
Aurora et al. (U.S. Patent No. 9,898,884, February 20, 2018) teaches a vending machine system where users can scan codes on vending machines with their phone and send the machine identifier to a server to make product purchase selections via their phone.
Conclusion
No claim is allowed
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES M DETWEILER whose telephone number is (571)272-4704. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8 AM to 5 PM ET.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Waseem Ashraf can be reached at telephone number (571)-270-3948. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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.
/JAMES M DETWEILER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3621
Prosecution Insights