DETAILED ACTION
1. This is the first action on the merits relating to U.S. Application Serial No. 19/229,159 filed on June 5, 2025. Currently claim 1 remains in the examination.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
2. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
3. Applicant’s disclosure of related application information as described in paragraph [0001] of the specification is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2009/0073070 A1 to Rofougaran (hereinafter “Rofougaran”).
Regarding claim 1, Rofougaran discloses a radio frequency identification (RFID) system (see paragraph 0009) comprising the RFID reader and tag wherein the reader is configured to decode the RFID tag (see paragraph 0010) and the RFID tag is attached to an item and used in application such as inventory reading and supply chain management application (see paragraphs 0013 and 0017); and the RFID is a dual-and tag; wherein the RFID tag operates in UHF and transmits one set of data (see abstract and paragraph 0015) and operates in lower frequency for sending the second data.
Double Patenting
7. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
8. Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,651,181 B2 to Leitermann et al. (hereinafter “181 patent”). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other as the following claim comparison would show.
Instant Application
181 patent
Claim 1
A system, comprising:
a memory; and a processor coupled to the memory and configured to execute instructions,
wherein the instructions cause the processor to: receive first identification information from a dual-frequency radio frequency identification (RFID) tag affixed to a product at a first frequency at a first location;
register a status of the product based on the first identification information in the memory which includes an indication with regard to whether the product is a temperature sensitive product;
receive second identification information from the dual-frequency RFID tag affixed to the product at a second frequency at a second location; and
update the status in the memory based on the second identification information.
Claim 1
A system, comprising:
a memory; and a processor coupled to the memory and configured to execute instructions,
wherein the instructions cause the processor to: receive first identification information from a dual-frequency radio frequency identification (RFID) tag affixed to a product at a first frequency at a first location;
register a status of the product based on the first identification information in the memory which includes an indication with regard to whether the product is a temperature sensitive product;
receive second identification information from the dual-frequency RFID tag affixed to the product at a second frequency at a second location; and
update the status in the memory based on the second identification information,
wherein the first location is outside a freezer and the second location is inside the freezer.
As shown in the claim comparison above, all the limitation of claim 1 of the instant application is verbatim shown in claim 1 of 181 patent (see the underlined section). Claim 1 of 181 patent comprise additional limitation, therefore, the limitation of claim 1 of the instant application is broader than claim 1 of 181 patent. Accordingly, claim 1 of the instant application is rejected under the non-statutory double patenting rejection.
Conclusion
The pertinent prior arts made of record but not relied are listed in the attached form PTO-892. These are considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure. Applicant is respectfully suggested to carefully review these references.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ahshik Kim whose telephone number is (571)272-2393. The examiner can normally be reached between the hours of 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM Monday thru Friday. Examiner’s fax phone number is (571)273-2393.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Michael G. Lee, can be reached on (571)272-2398. The fax phone number for this Group is (571)273-8300.
Communications via Internet e-mail regarding this application, other than those under 35 U.S.C. 132 or which otherwise require a signature, may be used by the applicant and should be addressed to [ahshik.kim@uspto.gov].
PTO employees do not engage in Internet communications where there exists a possibility that sensitive information could be identified or exchanged unless the record includes a properly signed express waiver of the confidentiality requirements of 35 U.S.C. 122. This is more clearly set forth in the Interim Internet Usage Policy published in the Official Gazette of the Patent and Trademark on February 25, 1997 at 1195 OG 89.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/AHSHIK KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876
February 17, 2026