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 .
Status of Claims
Applicant’s submission filed 5/9/25 has been entered. Claims 1 -18 are presented for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 5/9/25 has been considered by the examiner.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-18 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, 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 1 recites ‘currency’. The dependent claims recite ‘banknotes’ in the same context. It is unclear if the banknotes and the currencies are the same items. Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957).
A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claims 1-5 of prior U.S. Patent No. 1-5 of U.S. Patent No. 12314921. This is a statutory double patenting rejection.
Please see claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12314921 below as an example.
App.# 19/203,719 Patent No. 12314921
A method performed by an automated transaction machine (ATM) comprising: maintaining, with the ATM, a count of disbursement commands received by the ATM that require the ATM to dispense a stack size of currency greater than or equal to a first predetermined amount;
A method performed by an automated transaction machine (ATM) comprising: maintaining, with the ATM, a count of disbursement commands received by the ATM that requires the ATM to dispense a stack size of banknotes greater than or equal to a first predetermined amount;
-- comparing, with the ATM, the count to a second predetermined amount;
comparing, with the ATM, the count to a second predetermined amount;
and aborting, by the ATM, a first disbursement command that requires a stack size of currency to be dispensed by the ATM that is greater than or equal to the first predetermined amount in response to said comparing when the count is greater than or equal to the second predetermined amount.
aborting, with the ATM, a first disbursement command requiring a stack size of banknotes to be dispensed by the ATM that is greater than or equal to the first predetermined amount in response to said comparing when the count is greater than or equal to the second predetermined amount;
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Horgan (US-20150278818-A1)
Bosch (US-20040133495-A1)
Gasper (US-7340415-B1)
Nelson (US-20200066110-A1)
Miller (US-20140351125-A1)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LUNA CHAMPAGNE whose telephone number is (571)272-7177. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00.
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.
/LUNA CHAMPAGNE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627
July 16, 2026
Prosecution Insights