Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/239,954

CASH HANDLING SYSTEM AND CASH HANDLING METHOD

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Jun 17, 2025
Examiner
KIM, TAE W
Art Unit
2876
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Glory Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
56%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 11m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 56% of resolved cases
56%
Career Allow Rate
190 granted / 342 resolved
-12.4% vs TC avg
Strong +36% interview lift
Without
With
+36.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 11m
Avg Prosecution
18 currently pending
Career history
360
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.0%
-38.0% vs TC avg
§103
53.8%
+13.8% vs TC avg
§102
16.5%
-23.5% vs TC avg
§112
24.6%
-15.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 342 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
DETAILED ACTION 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 2-4 and 6-9 are 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 2 recites the limitation, “the bank support server.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. All dependent claims are also indefinite at least due to the dependency on the base claim. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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) 1-4, 10, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Morito (JP 2005010911 A). Re Claim 1: Morito discloses a cash handling system comprising: a cash handling apparatus (fig1: 12) installed in a store (fig 1: 11) and operable based on a first application and a second application, the first application being configured to handle cash withdrawn from a bank account of a customer of the store and cash deposited into the bank account (p56: general financial transaction, and starts an operation for performing a normal financial transaction such as deposit, with), the second application being configured to handle sales proceeds and change funds of the store (p57: a screen for selecting the register machine 17 is displayed on the touch panel of the operation unit.); and an acquisition unit configured to acquire ID information from a user (p56: clerk card) of the cash handling apparatus (p56: determines whether or not the card corresponds to a clerk card registered in advance), wherein the cash handling apparatus operates based on the first application or the second application selected according to the ID information acquired by the acquisition unit (p56: when the card does not correspond to the clerk card, the automatic transaction device 12 determines that the card is a general card to be used for a general financial transaction, p57: when it is determined that the card is a salesperson card, the automatic transaction device 12 may select a corresponding register machine 17 from among the plurality of register machines 17. In this case, a screen for selecting the register machine 17 is displayed on the touch panel of the operation unit.), displays different operation screens between a case where the first application is executed and a case where the second application is executed (p56: starts an operation for performing a normal financial transaction such as deposit, withdrawal, bankbook entry, balance inquiry, transfer, transfer, remittance, and periodic deposit setting. p57: In this case, a screen for selecting the register machine 17 is displayed on the touch panel of the operation unit.), and performs cash handling corresponding to an operation performed on the operation screen. Re Claim 2: Morito discloses the cash handling system according to claim 1 further comprising a configured to support handling on a bank account, wherein in a case where the first application is executed (p56: general financial transaction,), information on cash handling performed by the cash handling apparatus is transmitted to the bank support server (fig 1: 16), and the bank support server performs the handling on the bank account. Re Claim 3: Morito discloses the cash handling system according to claim 2 further comprising a store support server (fig 1: 13, fig 2: 13) configured to support handling on cash of the store, wherein in a case where the second application is executed (p57), the information on the cash handling performed by the cash handling apparatus and the user ID acquired by the acquisition unit are transmitted to the store support server, and in a case where the user is determined to be a clerk of the store based on the received user ID, the store support server performs a process for updating information on cash of the store (p57) in a case where the user is determined to be a clerk of another store, the store support server performs a process for updating information on cash of the other store (p19 & p22: a plurality of stores 11, p39: the first storage unit 32 includes a data-storing file 32a,32b,32c corresponding to each shop 11, the second storage unit 33 includes a data-storing file 33a,33b,33c corresponding to each store 11. the third storage section 34 includes a data-storing file 34a,34b,34c corresponding to each shop 11.). Re Claim 4: Morito discloses the cash handling system according to claim 3, wherein the store support server (fig 1: 13, fig 2: 13) stores therein information on cash of a plurality of stores including the store and the other store (p19 & p22: a plurality of stores 11), and conditions for account handling on a bank account of each store for which cash handling has been performed by the cash handling apparatus (fig 5, p43: the left column shows the operation from opening to closing of the store 11), and determines, based on the conditions, a timing to perform the account handling on the bank account for reflecting a result of the cash handling having been performed by the cash handling apparatus in the balance of the bank account of the corresponding store (fig 5, p43: the left column shows the operation from opening to closing of the store 11), and the bank support server (fig 1: 16, fig 2: 16) performs the account handling on the bank account, based on the determination by the store support server. Re Claim 10: Morito discloses the cash handling system according to claim 1, wherein the cash handling apparatus accepts a login operation performed by the user (p56: determines whether or not the card corresponds to a clerk card registered in advance), and operates based on the second application when the user is authenticated (p57: when it is determined that the card is a salesperson card, the automatic transaction device 12 may select a corresponding register machine 17 from among the plurality of register machines 17. In this case, a screen for selecting the register machine 17 is displayed on the touch panel of the operation unit). Re Claim 11: Morito discloses a cash handling method performed by a cash handling system including a cash handling apparatus (fig1: 12) configured to be usable as an ATM by a customer of a store (fig 1: 11), the method comprising: acquiring ID information from a user who requests the cash handling apparatus to perform cash handling (p56: determines whether or not the card corresponds to a clerk card registered in advance); causing the cash handling apparatus to operate based on the first application or the second application selected according to the ID information, the first application being configured to handle cash withdrawn from a bank account of a customer of the store and cash deposited into the bank account, the second application being configured to handle sales proceeds and change funds of the store (p56: when the card does not correspond to the clerk card, the automatic transaction device 12 determines that the card is a general card to be used for a general financial transaction, p57: when it is determined that the card is a salesperson card, the automatic transaction device 12 may select a corresponding register machine 17 from among the plurality of register machines 17. In this case, a screen for selecting the register machine 17 is displayed on the touch panel of the operation unit.); causing the cash handling apparatus to display different operation screens between a case where the first application is executed and a case where the second application is executed (p56: starts an operation for performing a normal financial transaction such as deposit, withdrawal, bankbook entry, balance inquiry, transfer, transfer, remittance, and periodic deposit setting. p57: In this case, a screen for selecting the register machine 17 is displayed on the touch panel of the operation unit.), and causing the cash handling apparatus to perform cash handling corresponding to an operation performed on the operation screen. 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. Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morito (JP 2005010911 A). Re Claim 5: First embodiment of Morito discloses the cash handling system according to claim 1. However, First embodiment of Morito does not disclose that wherein the cash handling apparatus stores therein information on content of cash handling performed during an operation based on the first application, and information on content of cash handling performed during an operation based on the second application, so as to be distinguishable from each other. Second embodiment of Morito however discloses that wherein the cash handling apparatus stores therein information on content of cash handling performed during a specific function, and information on content of cash handling performed during another function, so as to be distinguishable from each other (p38: the temporary account 24, the change account 25, and the proceeds account 26. The first storage unit 32 functions as the temporary account 24, the second storage unit 33 functions as the change account 25, and the third storage unit 34 functions as the proceeds account 26.). Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinarily skill in the art to incorporate second embodiment of Morito in the system of first embodiment of Morito for the purpose of organizing information. Claim(s) 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morito (JP 2005010911 A) in view of Takata (JP 2006127179 A). Re Claim 6: Morito discloses the cash handling system according to claim 2, wherein the first application is an application to be executed in response to an application executed by the bank support server. However, Morito does not disclose that the application is a web application. Takata however discloses that the application is a web application (fig 1, The browser 8 is software mainly having a function of browsing a screen to be displayed to the customer. The browser 8 issues a request to the Web application server 2 in response to the customer operation from the customer operation screen 7). Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinarily skill in the art to incorporate Takata’s teaching in the system of Morito for the purpose of the cost-effectiveness due to easy updates, as they require no local installation, and receive automatic server-side updates. Re Claim 7: Morito modified by Takata discloses the cash handling system according to claim 6, wherein the second application is a native application to be executed by the cash handling apparatus. Re Claim 8: Morito modified by Takata discloses the cash handling system according to claim 6, wherein in a case where the first application is executed, the cash handling apparatus displays the operation screen based on an instruction from the bank support server (Takata: abst: screen display processing and a client side device processing at the side of a client in a system for performing a device processing request from a Web application server to the client side, Takata: a customer operation screen (also referred to as a browser) of an automatic transaction apparatus as a client, and generates a display screen. The present invention relates to an automatic transaction system that performs a transaction by responding a display screen to a browser of an automatic transaction apparatus and displaying a screen for customer operation on the browser.). Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morito (JP 2005010911 A) modified by Takata (JP 2006127179 A) in view of Hatanaka (JP 2022173884 A). Re Claim 9: Morito modified by Takata discloses the cash handling system according to claim 8. However, Morito modified by Takata does not disclose that the cash handling apparatus displays, on the operation screen, code information for specifying the cash handling apparatus, and the bank support server specifies the cash handling apparatus to be used by the user, based on the code information read by a mobile communication terminal operated by the user, and transmits an instruction to the specified cash handling apparatus. Hatanaka however discloses that the cash handling apparatus displays, on the operation screen, code information for specifying the cash handling apparatus, and the bank support server specifies the cash handling apparatus to be used by the user, based on the code information read by a mobile communication terminal operated by the user, and transmits an instruction to the specified cash handling apparatus (the touchless transaction application instructs the user to read the two-dimensional code displayed on the display input unit 12 of the automated teller machine 10 with the portable terminal 3. Therefore, when the user reads the two-dimensional code with the camera (not shown) of the mobile terminal 3 (S20, S21), the touchless transaction application reads the ATM identification number and the transaction information). Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinarily skill in the art to incorporate Hatanaka’s teaching in the system of Morito modified by Takata for the purpose of identifying the specific cash handling apparatus. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAE W KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-5971. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30AM-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, Steven S Paik can be reached at 5712722404. 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. /TAE W KIM/ Examiner, Art Unit 2876 /THIEN M LE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 17, 2025
Application Filed
Dec 27, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12555444
AUTOMATED FEEDER SYSTEM AND METHODS OF USE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12536523
ACCOUNT REGISTRATION USING A CONTACTLESS CARD
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12524734
Data Reduction in a Bar Code Reading Robot Shelf Monitoring System
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Patent 12523349
MOUNTING MECHANISMS FOR ELECTRONIC LIGHTING DEVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Patent 12505458
BUSINESS PROCESS STARTING METHOD AND APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 23, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
56%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+36.2%)
3y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 342 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month