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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 12 recites the limitation "the REST API" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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, 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 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over European Publication No. 1 022 699 A2 to Monaghan (“Monaghan”) in view of United States Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0066844 A1 to Bronola et al. (“Bronola”).
As per claims 1, 10 and 15, the claimed subject matter that is met by Monaghan includes:
A retail transaction management system comprising (Monaghan: Fig. 1):
a computing device comprising (Monaghan: Fig. 1, 14):
a first interface configured to communicate with a system via a plurality of first sets of instructions (Monaghan: ¶ 0017 and Fig. 1, 22);
a second interface configured to communicate with a plurality of self-service terminals, SSTs, via a second set of instructions (Monaghan: ¶ 0019 and Fig. 1, 20);
a processor configured to (Monaghan: Fig. 1, 14):
receive, from the system, a first instruction of the plurality of first sets of instructions, wherein the first instruction is addressed to an SST of the plurality of SSTs (Monaghan: ¶ 0018);
convert the first instruction into a second instruction of the second set of instructions for a transmission to the SST (Monaghan: ¶ 0019);
where the SST comprises an SST processor configured to (Monaghan: Fig. 1, 16a):
receive the second instruction from the computing device (Monaghan: ¶ 0022); and
configure the SST based on the received second instruction (Monaghan: ¶¶ 0022-0023).
Monaghan fails to specifically teach a point of sale, POS, system. The Examiner provides Bronola to teach and disclose this claimed feature.
The claimed subject matter that is met by Bronola includes:
a first interface configured to communicate with a point of sale, POS, system via a plurality of first sets of instructions (Bronola: ¶ 0017);
Monaghan teaches a system and method for converting protocols between different systems. Bronola teaches a comparable system and method for converting protocols between different systems that was improved in the same way as the claimed invention. Bronola offers the embodiment of a point of sale, POS, system. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized the adaptation of the point of sale, POS, system as disclosed by Bronola to the system and method for converting protocols between different systems as taught by Monaghan for the predicted result of improved systems and methods for converting protocols between different systems. No additional findings are seen to be necessary.
As per claim 2, the claimed subject matter that is met by Monaghan and Bronola includes:
wherein the processor is further configured to: receive, from the SST, a third instruction of the second set of instructions; convert the third instruction into a fourth instruction of one of the plurality of first set of instructions for a transmission to the POS system (Monaghan: ¶ 0022).
The motivation for combining the teachings of Monaghan and Bronola are discussed in the rejection of claim 1, and are incorporated herein.
As per claims 3 and 16, the claimed subject matter that is met by Monaghan and Bronola includes:
wherein processor is further configured to encode the second instruction according to a socket-based communication protocol (Bronola: ¶¶ 0017, 0027 and 0045 and Fig. 1B).
The motivation for combining the teachings of Monaghan and Bronola are discussed in the rejection of claim 1, and are incorporated herein.
As per claim 4, the claimed subject matter that is met by Monaghan and Bronola includes:
wherein the second interface comprises one or more established socket connections with the SST; wherein each established socket connection is configured to carry data designated for the respective established socket connection (Bronola: ¶¶ 0017, 0027 and 0045 and Fig. 1B).
The motivation for combining the teachings of Monaghan and Bronola are discussed in the rejection of claim 1, and are incorporated herein.
As per claim 5, the claimed subject matter that is met by Monaghan and Bronola includes:
wherein the plurality of first set of instructions comprises instructions of one of a representational state transfer application programming interface, REST API, or WebSockets (Bronola: ¶¶ 0017, 0027 and 0045 and Fig. 1B).
The motivation for combining the teachings of Monaghan and Bronola are discussed in the rejection of claim 1, and are incorporated herein.
As per claims 6 and 12, the claimed subject matter that is met by Monaghan and Bronola includes:
wherein the processor is further configured to convert received instructions between the socket-based communication protocol and the REST API (Bronola: ¶¶ 0017, 0027 and 0045 and Fig. 1B).
The motivation for combining the teachings of Monaghan and Bronola are discussed in the rejection of claims 1 and 10, and are incorporated herein.
As per claim 7, the claimed subject matter that is met by Monaghan and Bronola includes:
wherein the processor is further configured to determine an operational first set of instructions from the plurality of first sets of instructions based on information representing the POS system; wherein the processor is further configured to convert received instructions, such that the conversion is to or from the operational first set of instructions (Monaghan: ¶¶ 0016-0022).
The motivation for combining the teachings of Monaghan and Bronola are discussed in the rejection of claim 1, and are incorporated herein.
As per claim 8, the claimed subject matter that is met by Monaghan and Bronola includes:
wherein the processor is further configured to convert the first instruction into the second instruction using a transport-layer conversion function (Monaghan: ¶ 0022).
The motivation for combining the teachings of Monaghan and Bronola are discussed in the rejection of claim 1, and are incorporated herein.
As per claim 9, the claimed subject matter that is met by Monaghan and Bronola includes:
wherein the processor is further configured to: monitor instructions received from the first interface to identify instructions addressed to the plurality of SSTs, such that each identified instruction is addressed to one or more SSTs of the plurality of SSTs; route one or more converted instructions corresponding to each identified instruction to the respective one or more SSTs (Monaghan: ¶ 0018).
The motivation for combining the teachings of Monaghan and Bronola are discussed in the rejection of claim 1, and are incorporated herein.
As per claim 11, the claimed subject matter that is met by Monaghan and Bronola includes:
wherein the SST processor further comprises a protocol converter configured to convert the received second instruction and provide the converted second instruction to a self-service application (Monaghan: ¶¶ 0016-0023 and Fig. 1, 14).
The motivation for combining the teachings of Monaghan and Bronola are discussed in the rejection of claim 10, and are incorporated herein.
As per claims 13 and 18, the claimed subject matter that is met by Monaghan and Bronola includes:
wherein the SST processor is further configured to determine an address identifier for the POS system; wherein the SST processor is further configured to generate instructions addressed to the address identifier for the POS system (Monaghan: ¶¶ 0022-0023 and Bronola: ¶ 0027).
The motivation for combining the teachings of Monaghan and Bronola are discussed in the rejection of claim 10, and are incorporated herein.
As per claims 14, 19 and 20, the claimed subject matter that is met by Monaghan and Bronola includes:
further comprising the POS system configured to generate instructions according to a set of the plurality of first sets of instructions (Monaghan: ¶¶ 0017-0023).
The motivation for combining the teachings of Monaghan and Bronola are discussed in the rejection of claim 10, and are incorporated herein.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Hunter Wilder whose telephone number is (571)270-7948. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30AM-5:30PM.
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, Florian Zeender can be reached at (571)272-6790. 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.
/A. Hunter Wilder/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627
Prosecution Insights