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 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.
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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Srivastava et al. (US 20190005343).
See the whole document. There are at least three overhead cameras, which perform categorizing and each is used for identification, based on three or more different views, as in the claims.
Regarding cropping:
[0109] In some embodiments, example machine-learning algorithms are used at the kiosk to perform image-based recognition. If several items are detected in the examination space, the items are separated, and separate geometric models of each item are created. The machine-learning algorithms utilize the training data 1212 to find correlations among identified features 1202 that affect the outcome.
Double Patenting
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.
Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. US 11134798. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant claim is generally contained within the limitations of claim 1 of the patent.
Instant claim 1, which reads, “1. A method, comprising: obtaining three images within a scan zone of a vision-based transaction terminal; determining an item location for each item present within scan zone from the three images; cropping out pixels associated with each item from each of the three images creating three cropped images for each item present within the scan zone; categorizing each item into an item category based on each item’s three cropped images; recognizing each item with a unique item identifier based on the corresponding item category and the corresponding item’s three cropped images; providing each item identifier to a transaction manager of the vision-based transaction terminal to process a transaction at the vision-based transaction terminal.”
Is contained within claim 1 of the patent which reads:
“1. A method, comprising: obtaining three images within a scan zone of a vision-based transaction terminal; determining an item location for each item present within scan zone from the three images; cropping out pixels associated with each item from each of the three images creating three cropped images for each item present within the scan zone; categorizing each item into an item category based on each item's three cropped images; recognizing each item with a unique item identifier based on the corresponding item category and the corresponding item's three cropped images; providing each item identifier to a transaction manager of the vision-based transaction terminal to process a transaction at the vision-based transaction terminal; wherein the vision-based transaction terminal comprises: a scan area representing the scan zone; a touch display; a processor; a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising executable instructions for the obtaining, the determining, the cropping, the categorizing, the recognizing, the providing, and the transaction manager; a base situated at the bottom of the scan area, wherein the base comprises an integrated weigh scale to record item weights for any single item present on the base within the scan area; three vertically situated bars attached to three sides of the base and extending upward from the base at an obtuse angle, wherein the three vertically situated bars comprise a right bar attached to a right side of the base, a left bar attached to a left side of the base, and a center bar attached to a rear-center side of the base; three horizontal bars forming a U-shape and attached to tops of the three vertically situated bars; and three cameras are integrated or attached to the tops of the three vertically situated bars and focused downward onto the scan area to provide the three images.”
Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 18 of U.S. Patent No. US 11944215. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant claim is generally contained within the limitations of claim 18 of the patent.
Instant claim 1, which reads, “1. A method, comprising: obtaining three images within a scan zone of a vision-based transaction terminal; determining an item location for each item present within scan zone from the three images; cropping out pixels associated with each item from each of the three images creating three cropped images for each item present within the scan zone; categorizing each item into an item category based on each item’s three cropped images; recognizing each item with a unique item identifier based on the corresponding item category and the corresponding item’s three cropped images; providing each item identifier to a transaction manager of the vision-based transaction terminal to process a transaction at the vision-based transaction terminal.”
Is contained within claim 18 of the patent which reads:
“A system, comprising: a transaction terminal; three cameras affixed to or integrated into a top portion of the transaction terminal wherein at least one of the cameras is an elevated centered overhead camera relative to a scan zone; a base of the transaction terminal associated with the scan zone; three vertical bars extending upward from the base at an obtuse angle; a server comprising a processor to execute executable instructions; wherein the three cameras configured to provide three different images of a scan zone to the server, wherein each cameras situated on one of three vertical bars of the transaction terminal and attached to a corresponding top portion of a corresponding vertical bar; wherein the processor configured to: identify each item placed within the scan zone from each of the three different images based at least on a calculated distance between each camera and a corresponding item present in the scan zone using the corresponding image captured by the corresponding camera; crop each item from the three different images into three cropped images; obtain visual features for each item from the corresponding three cropped images; classify the visual features of each item to a specific item category; identify an item identifier for each item using the corresponding visual features and the corresponding specific item category; obtain item information and item pricing for each item identifier; and provide the item identifier, the item information, and the item pricing for each item placed within the scan zone to the transaction terminal to process during a checkout at the transaction terminal.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL A HESS whose telephone number is (571)272-2392. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, from 9 AM to 5 PM.
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, Michael G. Lee can be reached at (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 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.
/DANIEL A HESS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876
Prosecution Insights