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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to application 19/199,245 filed 5/5/25. Claims 120 are pending with claim 1 in independent form.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-7 and 15-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Powell et al. US 2020/0257869 A1.
Powell teaches:
Re: claim 1, A scanning device, comprising: an imager (imager 110) configured to capture images of items passing through a field of view ([0053]); a memory (memory 104, 106) having rules stored thereon associated with actions to be taken based on decoded GS 1 label application data ([0035]); and a processor (processor 102) operably coupled to the imager and the memory, the processor configured to generate unique actions for specific results of checks on GS 1 label application data decoded from a GS 1 Digital Link label on the item ([0077], [0080], [0086]-[0090], [0103]).
Re: claim 2, The scanning device of claim 1, wherein the unique actions include the scanning device transmitting a special message to a host over a host interface ([0077], [0080], [0086]-[0090], [0103]).
Re: claim 3, The scanning device of claim 1, wherein the unique actions include the scanning device transmitting special label data to a host over a host interface ([0077]).
Re: claim 4, The scanning device of claim 1, wherein the unique actions include the scanning device generating a unique audible message based on the GS 1 label application data ([0075]).
Re: claim 5, The scanning device of claim 4, wherein the unique audible message includes at least one of a unique beep volume, unique beep frequency, unique beep pattern, unique sound pattern from a wave file or other sound representation ([0075]).
Re: claim 6, The scanning device of claim 1, wherein the unique actions include the scanning device producing a unique visual message based on the GS 1 label application data ([0075]).
Re: claim 7, The scanning device of claim 6, wherein the unique visual message includes at least one of a unique hue or pattern of hues of an illumination source or pattern of illumination sources, unique flash pattern of an illumination source or pattern of illumination sources, a unique brightness of an illumination source or pattern of illumination sources ([0075] indicator light).
Re: claim 15, The scanning device of claim 1, wherein the unique actions are based on configuration settings ([0013], [0052], [0138]).
Re: claim 16, The scanning device of claim 1, wherein the configuration settings may be enabled or disabled by a user ([0013], [0052], [0138]).
Re: claim 17, the scanning device of claim 1, wherein the unique actions include transmitting a command to a point-of-sale (POS) system over a first communication channel instructing the POS system to generate an alert based on the GS 1 label application data ([0075]).
Re: claim 18, The scanning device of claim 17, wherein the POS system includes a POS application for managing a transaction using GTINs received by the scanning device ([0038]-[0039], [0041]-[0042]).
Re: claim 19, The scanning device of claim 17, wherein the POS system includes a virtual display application for managing the commands received by the scanning device based on the GS 1 label application data, wherein the POS application and the virtual display application are independent from each other ([0041]-[0042]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 8-9, 12 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Powell et al. US 2020/0257869 A1 in view of Baiera US 2009/0204415 A1.
The teachings of Powell have been discussed above.
Powell fails to specifically teach:
Re: claim 8, The scanning device of claim 1, wherein the processor configured to generate unique actions when a specific product is scanned to remind the user of a special action that is needed.
However, Baiera teaches:
Re: claim 8, The scanning device of claim 1, wherein the processor configured to generate unique actions when a specific product is scanned to remind the user of a special action that is needed (abstract).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Baiera into the system of Powell thereby ensuring consumer safety by preventing exposure to products that may be contaminated or dangerous ([0002]-[0003]).
Re: claim 9, Powell as modified by Baiera additionally teaches the scanning device of claim 1, wherein the processor configured to generate unique actions when a specific batch or lot number of a specific product is scanned to identify a recalled item (Baiera – abstract).
Re: claim 12, Powell as modified by Baiera additionally teaches the scanning device of claim 1, wherein the processor configured to generate unique actions when a specific serial number or range of serial numbers is scanned to identify a recalled item (Baiera – abstract; [0027]).
Re: claim 20, Powell as modified by Baiera teaches the scanning device of claim 19, wherein the virtual display application triggers a pop-up window over a GUI for the POS application in response to the command received by the scanning device ([0026]-[0027], [0035], [0038], [0047]).
Claim(s) 10-11 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Powell et al. US 2020/0257869 A1 in view of Tak US 2012/0095823 A1.
The teachings of Powell have been discussed above.
Powell fails to specifically teach:
Re: claim 10, The scanning device of claim 1, wherein the processor configured to generate unique actions when a product is scanned on or after the expiration date to prevent the item from being sold or cause the product to be sold at a reduced price.
However, Tak teaches:
Re: claim 10, The scanning device of claim 1, wherein the processor configured to generate unique actions when a product is scanned on or after the expiration date to prevent the item from being sold or cause the product to be sold at a reduced price ([0080]-[0082]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Tak into the system of Powell to decrease the waste of products and provide quality control ([0011]-[0012] and preventing the sale of foods that have expired [0133])).
Re: claim 11, Powell as modified by Tak additionally teaches the scanning device of claim 1, wherein the processor configured to generate unique actions when a product is scanned within a timeframe of the expiration date to indicate the product should be sold at a reduced in price (Tak – [0080]-[0082]).
Re: claim 13, Powell as modified by Tak additionally teaches the scanning device of claim 1, wherein the processor configured to generate unique actions in response to a specific label type being decoded ([0076] sub bar code 250).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 14 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record fails to teach or fairly suggest to one of ordinary skill in the art, in conjunction with all the other limitations of the claims: With respect to claim 14 and all its dependencies, wherein the processor configured to generate unique actions to inform a user that a specific label type has not yet been decoded, when included with all the limitations of claim 1 from which it depends. The prior art of record fails to provide sufficient teaching or motivation to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the additionally recited features of these claims in the combinations as claimed.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KRISTY A HAUPT whose telephone number is (571)272-8545 and email address is kristy.haupt@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Sun 5:30 AM- 10PM; Flex during day.
If all attempts to reach the examiner by telephone and email are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Michael Lee, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-2398. 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.
/KRISTY A HAUPT/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876
KAH