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 Objections
Claim 25 objected to because of the following informalities: “proudct” should be “product”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claim(s) 1-11, 13-23, 25-27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DeLine (US 20090048945 A1) in view of Johnson (US 20160332861 A1) and Schulz (US 20100281374 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 8 and 9, DeLine discloses:
1. A product dispenser (fig. 1), comprising:an interactive display (fig. 7);at least one processor (paragraph 39, fig. 4); and a memory storing instructions that, when executed (fig. 4 34) by the at least one processor, cause the product dispenser to:present a plurality of graphical elements in a first arrangement on the interactive display, each graphical element in the plurality of graphical elements characterizing a product to be dispensed for a user (fig. 7 62);
DeLine fails to disclose the scrolling aspect showing additional products as indicated above by the strikethrough text above, and the subject matter of claims 8 and 9.
However in an analogous art, Johnson discloses:
9. The product dispenser of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the product dispenser to blend a plurality of fuel ingredients together to result in the additional product corresponding to the user-selected, additional graphical element (fig. 3, paragraph 1, paragraph 24-27). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine this teaching with DeLine by expanding product offering by offering a variety of different blends. The motivation for the combination is savings from reduced storage capacity (paragraph 2).
DeLine and Johnson suggest an expanded offering, but fail to disclose claim 8 and the use of a scrolling menu (strikethrough text claim 1).
However in an analogous art, Schulz discloses:
responsive to at least one user input received at the interactive display, move the plurality of graphical elements from the first arrangement presented on the interactive display to a second arrangement presented on the interactive display, the second arrangement including at least one additional selectable graphical element corresponding to an additional option (paragraph 124, fig. 6, claim 11 display “subset”)
wherein moving the plurality of graphical elements from the first arrangement to the second arrangement comprises a lateral shift of at least one of the plurality of graphical elements (paragraph 54 horizontal scrolling).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine this teaching with DeLine as modified by using horizontal scrolling to browse between available options for fueling. The motivation for the combination is efficient screen space usage (paragraph 4).
Claims 2-6 are rejected based on the combination made for claim 1 resulting in a scrollable menu containing a variety of selectable fuel blends at different octane levels, the blends indicated by graphical elements. Of course some blends have greater/lower octane levels than other blends.
Regarding claim 7, DeLine discloses wherein the interactive display comprises a touchscreen, and wherein the at least one user input comprises a touch of the touchscreen (abstract, fig. 7, 62).
Regarding claim 10, DeLine further discloses: 10. The product dispenser of claim 9, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the display of a unit price of the additional product on the interactive display (fig. 7 62).
Regarding claim 11, DeLine further discloses: 11. The product dispenser of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the product dispenser to:receive, from an image sensor disposed on the product dispenser (paragraph 34), data characterizing facial features of a user (paragraph 41, paragraph 45 );identify, based on the received data, a user identity (paragraph 45); andassociate the user identity with a pre-existing loyalty rewards status (paragraph 46, paragraph 50, fig. 7 66 user identity associated with loyalty program).
Claims 13-23 are rejected for the same reasons as claims 1-11.
Claim 25 is rejected for the same reasons as claims 1/13.
Claim 26 is rejected for the same reasons as claims 7/19.
Claim 27 is rejected for the same reasons as claims 8/20.
Claim(s) 12, 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DeLine (US 20090048945 A1) in view of Johnson (US 20160332861 A1) and Schulz (US 20100281374 A1) as applied to claim 11/23 and further in view of Ciancio (US 20070152038 A1)
Regarding claim 12, DeLine as modified fails to disclose and Ciancio discloses wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the product dispenser to update, based on the pre-existing loyalty rewards status, a fuel price of the additional product displayed on the interactive display (paragraph 64). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine this teaching with DeLine as modified by updating displayed prices based on loyalty status. The motivation for the combination is improve discount application (paragraph 8).
Claim 24 is rejected for the same reason as above, but applied to claim 23.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Bekemeyer (US 20050055874 A1) discloses a fuel dispenser with interface for selecting a fuel blend.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHAN A MITCHELL whose telephone number is (571)270-3117. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Ryan 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.
/NATHAN A MITCHELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627
