Ex Parte Mamedrzaev

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Apr 8, 2013

11104813 (P.T.A.B. Apr. 8, 2013)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________

BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
____________

Ex parte SERGUEI N. MAMEDRZAEV
____________

Appeal 2010-009941
Application 11/104,813
Technology Center 2800
____________

Before BRUCE R. WINSOR, JEREMY J. CURCURI,
and BARBARA A. BENOIT, Administrative Patent Judges.

WINSOR, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL
Appellant appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from a Final Rejection of
claims 1-43, which constitute all the claims pending in this application. We
have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We affirm-in-part and institute a new ground of rejection within the
provisions of 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b).

Appeal 2010-009941
Application 11/104,813

2
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
[Appellant’s] invention relates to a method of rapidly
informing a passerby about a food-and- beverage establishment,
so as to entice the passerby to use the services of the
establishment. A preferred aspect of the invention comprises
attracting the attention of a passerby outside the establishment
with a default mode of dynamically broadcasting text, graphics
or sounds.
Spec. 2:7-11. Claim 1, which is illustrative of the invention, reads as
follows:
1. A method of rapidly informing a chance pedestrian
passerby outside a food-and-beverage establishment
about the establishment, so as to entice the passerby to
use the services of the food-and-beverage establishment,
comprising:
a) placing an interactive electronic menu board
without any ordering capability in a location
accessible by a pedestrian passerby from outside
the food-and-beverage establishment; the
interactive menu board showing, by graphical and
textual content, different aspects of the food-and-
beverage establishment, and having user-activated
links that enable the passerby to expand on a
desired category of information about the aspects,
and thereby rapidly informing the passerby about
the food-and-beverage establishment;
b) the menu board screen providing a passerby with
an information-gathering but non-purchasing
relationship with the food-and-beverage
establishment so that the passerby can become
informed about the food-and-beverage
establishment in a non-committal manner; and
c) the primary purpose of the menu board being to
promote the services of a single food-and-beverage
establishment.
Appeal 2010-009941
Application 11/104,813

3
The Examiner relies on the following prior art in rejecting the claims:
Tengler US 2005/0049940 A1 Mar. 3, 2005
Dietz US 2006/0085265 A1 Apr. 20, 2006
(filed Sept. 2, 2004)
Epicure Digital Signage and Menuboards, http://www.epicuredigital.
com/digitalsigns/system.html (accessed May 19, 2005; provided by
Appellant with Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) filed June 20, 2008)
[hereinafter Epicure I1].
Restaurant Kiosks/Hotel Kiosks/Retail Kiosk, http://www.scream.
co.uk/restaurant_hotel_retail_kiosks.html (accessed May 19, 2005; provided
by Appellant with IDS filed June 20, 2008) [hereinafter Scream Kiosk].
Claims 35-43 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph,
as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim
the subject matter which Appellant regards as the invention. Ans. 9.
Claims 1-6, 9-25, and 28-32 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as unpatentable over Tengler, Epicure I, and Scream Kiosk. Ans. 3-8.
Claims 7, 8, 26, 27, 33, and 34 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as unpatentable over Tengler, Epicure I, Scream Kiosk, and Dietz.
Ans. 9.
Rather than repeat the arguments here, we refer to the Briefs (App. Br.
filed Sept. 24, 2009; Reply Br. filed May 4, 2010)2 and the Answer (Ans.
mailed Mar. 4, 2010) for the respective positions of Appellant and the
Examiner. Only those arguments actually made by Appellant have been
considered in this decision. Arguments that Appellant did not make in the
Briefs have not been considered and are deemed to be waived. See
37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(1)(vii) (2010).

1 Referred to as “Epicure” in the record.
2 The Appeal Briefs filed April 6, 2009, and June 8, 2009, have not been
considered as they are deemed to have been superseded.
Appeal 2010-009941
Application 11/104,813

4

REJECTION UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 112, 2d ¶
The Examiner has rejected claims 35-43 under 35 U.S.C. § 112,
second paragraph, as indefinite. Ans. 9. More particularly, claims 35-43 are
directed to an apparatus (i.e., a menu board), which is a different statutory
class than the method claims from which they depend. Ans. 9, 14-15.
Appellant indicates that in view of the Examiner’s comments in the Answer,
Appellant’s request for clarification in the Appeal Brief is moot. Reply Br.
17-18 (citing App. Br. 26; Ans. 15). Appellant does not contend that the
rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, as explained in the
Answer, see Ans. 14-15, is in error. Accordingly, we summarily sustain the
rejection of claims 35-43.

REJECTION UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) OVER TENGLER,
EPICURE I, AND SCREAM KIOSK
Issue
The dispositive issue raised by Appellant’s contentions is as follows:3
Does Tengler teach or suggest “placing an interactive electronic menu board
without any ordering capability in a location accessible by a pedestrian
passerby from outside the food-and-beverage establishment,” as recited in
claim 1?

3 Appellant’s contentions raise additional issues. However, as we are
persuaded of Examiner error with regard to the identified issue, which is
dispositive of the rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a), we do not reach
Appellant’s other contentions.
Appeal 2010-009941
Application 11/104,813

5
Analysis
The Examiner finds that Tengler teaches placing the interactive
electronic menu board designed for outdoor use in the drive through 26, and
therefore “in a location accessible by a pedestrian passerby from outside the
food-and-beverage establishment.” Ans. 4 (citing Tengler, ¶ [0088]). The
Examiner further explains that in Tengler:
there are two different drive-through modes, one mode which
involves live order-takers and one which is automated (so-
called zoom-through lanes). See for instance paragraph 0047 of
Tengler:
“Additional order points and drive-through displays are
provided ahead of the lanes of the drive-through 26 in a so-
called zoom-through 32. Customers who do not need extra
assistance from live order takers and can pay quickly using
a credit card, place orders at order points in the lanes in the
zoom-through 32 with workers in the area 16. Such extra
assistance includes questions about menu choices. Customers
who do need the extra assistance from operators in the area
16 place orders at order points in the lanes of the drive-
through 26 with operators in the order entry area 16.”
It is clear from the above that live order takers can be
avoided outdoors using the zoom-through mode. If live order-
takers are avoid, [sic] the zoom-through mode would therefore
need to involve interactive menus similar to the indoor ordering
systems. The telephonic ordering which the Appellant points to
is actually only one of the two drive-through modes, and not the
relevant mode for this discussion.
Ans. 12-13.
Appellant contends that Tengler teaches Remote Payment Service
terminals, not menu boards, designed for outdoor use, at Tengler’s drive-
through, and that Tengler uses speaker/microphones rather than interactive
menu boards for order placing at the drive-through. See generally App. Br.
Appeal 2010-009941
Application 11/104,813

6
11-15 (citing Tengler, ¶¶ [0033], [0065]-[0066], [0068], [0087]-[0090]; Fig.
2, 13). Appellant further contends that Tengler, and in particular Tengler’s
paragraph [0047], teaches that zoom-throughs, like drive-throughs, use
speaker/microphones rather than interactive menu boards for order placing.
See generally Reply Br. 2-8 (citing Tengler, ¶¶ [0009], [0018], [0033],
[0038]-[0039], [0076], [0088]; Figs. 1, 13).
We agree with Appellant. As pointed out by Appellant, see Reply Br.
6, the principal passage of Tengler relied upon by the Examiner to teach the
use of an interactive menu board outside the food-and-beverage
establishment states that “[c]ustomers who do not need extra assistance from
live order takers and can pay quickly using a credit card, place orders at
order points in the lanes in the zoom-through 32 with workers in the area
16.” Tengler, ¶ [0047] (emphases added). Tengler does teach self-service
ordering kiosks, which in turn teaches interactive menu boards, see Tengler,
¶¶ [0009], [0045], [0064]-[0066], [0093], [0105], [0110], [0120], but the
Examiner does not direct us to any passage that persuades us that Tengler
teaches or suggests that kiosks are to be placed outside the food-and-
beverage establishment. We find that the Examiner’s reliance on Tengler to
teach or suggest “placing an interactive electronic menu board without any
ordering capability in a location accessible by a pedestrian passerby from
outside the food-and-beverage establishment,” as recited in claim 1, was
based on a misunderstanding of Tengler’s teachings.
Therefore, the Examiner has not established a prima facie case for the
obviousness of claim 1.4 Accordingly, we do not sustain the rejection of (1)

4 We note in passing that, should there be additional prosecution of claim 1,
consideration should be given to whether claim 1 is indefinite for mixing
Appeal 2010-009941
Application 11/104,813

7
claim 1; (2) independent claims 18 and 30 which include substantially the
same limitation which the Examiner erroneously found to be taught or
suggested by Tengler, and (3) claims 2-6, 9-17, 19-25, 28, 29, 31, and 32,
which depend directly or indirectly from claim 1, 18, or 30.

REJECTION UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) OVER TENGLER,
EPICURE I, SCREAM KIOSK, AND DIETZ
Claims 7, 8, 26, 27, 33, and 34 depend directly or indirectly from
claim 1, 18, or 30. For the reasons discussed supra regarding claim 1, we do
not sustain the rejection of claims 7, 8, 26, 27, 33, and 34.

NEW GROUND OF REJECTION WITHIN 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b)
We rely on the following references not cited by the Examiner:
Epicure Digital (accessed Mar. 29, 2013; dated on or before Apr. 2,
2004)5 [hereinafter Epicure II], available at:
http://web.archive.org/web/20040209222416/http://www.epicur
edigital.com/digitalsigns/moreinfo.html [hereinafter
Epicure IIa].
http://web.archive.org/web/20031204200124/http://www.epicur
edigital.com/digitalsigns/godigital.html [hereinafter
Epicure IIb].

statutory classes of inventions. See IPXL Holdings, LLC. v. Amazon.com,
Inc., 430 F.3d 1377, 1384 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (stating “reciting both an
apparatus and a method of using that apparatus renders a claim indefinite
under section 112, paragraph 2”).
5 Epicure II is substantially similar to Epicure I, which was placed before the
Examiner in an IDS filed by Appellant and then challenged by the Appellant
as not being prior art (Reply Br. 1), with prima facie evidence from
web.archive.org of publication prior to the March 7, 2005, filing date of
Appellant’s provisional patent application 60/659,313.
Appeal 2010-009941
Application 11/104,813

8
http://web.archive.org/web/20031212005644/http://www.epicur
edigital.com/index.html [hereinafter Epicure IIc].
http://web.archive.org/web/20031204202120/http://www.epicur
edigital.com/digitalsigns/menuboards.html [hereinafter
Epicure IId].
http://web.archive.org/web/20031002091854/http://www.epicur
edigital.com/digitalsigns/company.html [hereinafter
Epicure IIe].
http://web.archive.org/web/20031204205517/http://www.epicur
edigital.com/digitalsigns/system.html [hereinafter
Epicure IIf].
http://web.archive.org/web/20031204203820/http://www.epicur
edigital.com/digitalsigns/multimedia.html [hereinafter
Epicure IIg].
http://web.archive.org/web/20030620000806/http://www.epicur
edigital.com/pdfs/godigital.pdf [hereinafter Epicure IIh]
http://web.archive.org/web/20030810113419/http://www.epicur
edigital.com/pdfs/specs.pdf [hereinafter Epicure IIi]
http://web.archive.org/web/20030609025935/http://epicuredigit
al.com/pdfs/softwareserver.pdf [hereinafter Epicure IIj]
http://web.archive.org/web/20030606123322/http://epicuredigit
al.com/pdfs/marketing.pdf [hereinafter Epicure IIk].
http://web.archive.org/web/20030607015546/http://epicuredigit
al.com/pdfs/multimedia.pdf [hereinafter Epicure IIl]
Mary Carlin, Retail Revolution, http://www.kioskbusiness.com/
JanFeb/articles/dept3.html (accessed May 19, 2005; provided by Appellant
with IDS filed June 20, 2008)6 [hereinafter Carlin].

6 On its face, Carlin was published at least by February 2005 (see “JanFeb”
in URL and subsequent access date in 2005), prior to the filing date of
Appellant’s provisional application. According to web.archive.org (see
http://web.archive.org/web/20020126211027/http://www.kioskbusiness.com
/JanFeb/articles/dept3.html), Carlin was available January 26, 2002.
Appeal 2010-009941
Application 11/104,813

9
Claims 1, 18, and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Tengler, Deitz, Epicure II, and Carlin.
Regarding claim 1, we first construe the claim. Claim construction is
an issue of law that we review de novo. Cordis Corp. v. Boston Scientific
Corp., 561 F.3d 1319, 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2009). Claims are not to be read in a
vacuum, but must be given their broadest reasonable interpretation in light
of the Specification as it would be interpreted by ordinary artisans. Phillips
v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 1316 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (en banc).
“Generally,” [the Federal Circuit has] said, “the preamble does
not limit the claims.” Allen Eng’g Corp. v. Bartell Indus., Inc.,
299 F.3d 1336, 1346 (Fed.Cir. 2002). Nonetheless, the
preamble may be construed as limiting “if it recites essential
structure or steps, or if it is ‘necessary to give life, meaning, and
vitality’ to the claim.” Catalina Mktg. Int’l, Inc. v.
Coolsavings.com, Inc., 289 F.3d 801, 808 (Fed.Cir.2002),
quoting Pitney Bowes, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 182 F.3d
1298, 1305 (Fed.Cir.1999). A preamble is not regarded as
limiting, however, “when the claim body describes a
structurally complete invention such that deletion of the
preamble phrase does not affect the structure or steps of the
claimed invention.” Catalina, 289 F.3d at 809.
Am. Med. Sys., Inc. v. Biolitec, Inc., 618 F.3d 1354, 1358-59 (Fed. Cir.
2010).
We conclude that the preamble of claim 1 does not give life and
meaning to the steps of the claim and does not limit how the steps of the
claim are performed. Therefore, although we have fully considered the
preamble in construing the claim, we conclude the preamble is a mere
statement of intended use or purpose that does not limit the claim, and we
will not give it patentable weight. See id.
Appeal 2010-009941
Application 11/104,813

10
Tengler (see Fig. 3), Deitz (see Fig. 1), Epicure II (see IIa), and Carlin
(see pp. 2-4) are all in the field of electronic menus and are, therefore,
analogous art. As to claim element (a), Tengler (Fig. 9) and Deitz (Fig. 1)
teach interactive electronic menu boards. Epicure II (IIa-l) teaches
electronic menu boards. Epicure II (IIb, IIh, IIi) teaches or suggests an
electronic menu board without any ordering capability. Epicure II (IId)
teaches placing an electronic menu board in a location that is accessible by a
pedestrian passerby from outside a food-and-beverage establishment. Carlin
(p. 7, “Kiosks Outdoors”) teaches an interactive electronic kiosk located
outdoors and therefore suggests locating an interactive menu board outside a
food-and-beverage establishment. Dietz (Figs. 1-6) teaches an interactive
menu board showing, by graphical and textual content, different aspects of
the food-and-beverage establishment, and having user-activated links that
enable the user (i.e., a passerby) to expand on a desired category of
information about the aspects. Although the phrase “thereby rapidly
informing the passerby about the food-and-beverage establishment” merely
recites an intended purpose or inherent result of the method and does not
affect how the steps are carried out, Epicure II (IIb, IId, IIh, IIi) teaches or
suggests rapidly informing the passerby about the food-and-beverage
establishment.
Regarding claim element (b), Epicure II (IIb, IId, IIh, IIi) teaches or
suggests a menu-board screen that provides the passerby with an information
gathering but non-purchasing relationship with the food-and-beverage
establishment. The phrase “so that the passerby can become informed about
the food-and-beverage establishment in a non-committal manner” merely
recites an intended purpose or inherent result of the method and does not
Appeal 2010-009941
Application 11/104,813

11
affect how the steps are carried out. Nonetheless, Epicure II (IIb, IId, IIh,
IIi) teaches or suggests rapidly informing the passerby about the food-and-
beverage establishment in a non-committal manner.
Claim element (c), which recites that “the primary purpose of the
menu board [is] to promote the services of a single food-and-beverage
establishment,” is, on its face, merely a statement of intended purpose.
Nonetheless, Epicure II (IId) teaches a menu board associated with a
“storefront” and therefore suggests a menu board to promote the services of
the single establishment that would usually be associated with the storefront.
Regarding claim 18, we apply the teachings and suggestions of
Tengler, Deitz, Epicure II, and Carlin as described supra regarding claim 1.
Construing claim element (d) of claim 18, we conclude that the phrase
“actual images” in claim element (d) merely describes the appearance or
content of the display of multiple items, does not affect the function, and, as
such, recites non-functional descriptive matter. We have fully considered
the phrase “actual images” and conclude it does not patentably distinguish
claim element (d) from a menu board in which graphic images (i.e., icons) or
descriptive text are displayed. See In re Ngai, 367 F.3d 1336, 1339 (Fed.
Cir. 2004); see also Ex Parte Nehls, 88 USPQ2d 1883, 1887-89 (BPAI
2008) (precedential) (discussing cases pertaining to non-functional
descriptive material). Tengler (Fig. 3) teaches an interactive electronic
menu board in which images of multiple items in a category of the services
of the establishment are simultaneously displayed. Deitz (Fig. 1) teaches an
interactive electronic menu board in which textual representations of
multiple items in a category of the services of the establishment are
simultaneously displayed. Although we do not give patentable weight to
Appeal 2010-009941
Application 11/104,813

12
“actual images,” we note that Dietz (Figs. 4, 6) teaches displaying actual
images of the services of the establishment.
Regarding claim 30, we apply the teachings and suggestions of
Tengler, Deitz, Epicure II, and Carlin as described supra regarding claims 1
and 18. Regarding claim element (d) of claim 30, Epicure II (IIb, IIe, IIh,
IIk, IIl) teaches or suggests broadcasting in a non-interactive mode,
dynamically changing text or graphics on the menu board or dynamically
changing sounds near the menu board, informing passersby. The phrases “of
the capability of the menu board” and “in a language that differs from a
default language” merely describe the content of the text, graphics, or sound
broadcast by the menu board and, as such, we construe those phrases to
recite nonfunctional descriptive matter. We have fully considered the
phrases, but we give them no patentable weight. See Nehls, 88 USPQ2d at
1887-89.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to
combine the above identified aspects of Tengler, Deitz, Epicure II, and
Carlin, because such a combination is merely a combination of familiar
elements according to known methods that does no more than yield
predictable results, KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 416 (2007),
and can be implemented by a person of ordinary skill in the art, see id.
at 417.
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board is a review body, rather than a
place of initial examination. We have entered new grounds of rejection of
claims 1, 18, and 30. However, we have not reviewed claims 2-17, 19-29,
and 31-43 to the extent necessary to determine whether these claims are
unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over Tengler, Deitz, Epicure II,
Appeal 2010-009941
Application 11/104,813

13
Carlin, or any other prior art, in view of our findings and conclusions herein
regarding claim 1. In the event of further prosecution we leave it to the
instant Examiner to determine the patentability of claims 2-17, 19-29, and
31-43 in view of our findings and conclusions herein. Our decision not to
enter a new ground of rejection for all claims should not be considered as an
indication regarding the appropriateness of further rejection or allowance of
the non-rejected claims.

ORDER
The decision of the Examiner to reject claims 35-43 is affirmed.
The decision of the Examiner to reject claims 1-35 is reversed.
We enter a new ground of rejection for claims 1, 18, and 30 under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
This decision contains new grounds of rejection pursuant to 37 C.F.R.
§ 41.50(b). Section 41.50(b) provides that “[a] new ground of rejection . . .
shall not be considered final for judicial review.”
Section 41.50(b) also provides that Appellant, WITHIN TWO
MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF THE DECISION, must exercise one of
the following two options with respect to the new ground of rejection to
avoid termination of the appeal as to the rejected claims:
(1) Reopen prosecution. Submit an appropriate
amendment of the claims so rejected or new evidence relating
to the claims so rejected, or both, and have the matter
reconsidered by the examiner, in which event the proceeding
will be remanded to the examiner. . . .
(2) Request rehearing. Request that the proceeding be
reheard under § 41.52 by the Board upon the same record.
37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b).
Appeal 2010-009941
Application 11/104,813

14
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(1). See 37 C.F.R.
§ 1.136(a)(1)(iv) (2010).

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b)

babc

Notice of References Cited

Application/Control No.

11/104,813
Applicant(s)/Patent Under
Reexamination
Serguei N. Mamedrzaev
Examiner

Daniel Hess
Art Unit

2800

Page 1 of 1

U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS

* Document Number Country Code-Number-Kind Code Date MM-YYYY

Name

Classification

A US-

B US-

C US-

D US-

E US-

F US-

G US-

H US-

I US-

J US-

K US-

L US-

M US-
FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS

* Document Number Country Code-Number-Kind Code Date MM-YYYY

Country

Name

Classification

N

O

P

Q

R

S

T
NON-PATENT DOCUMENTS
* Include as applicable: Author, Title Date, Publisher, Edition or Volume, Pertinent Pages)

U

Epicure Digital (accessed Mar. 29, 2013).

V

W

X

*A copy of this reference is not being furnished with this Office action. (See MPEP § 707.05(a).)
Dates in MM-YYYY format are publication dates. Classifications may be US or foreign.

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
PTO-892 (Rev. 01-2001) Notice of References Cited Part of Paper No.
Delete Last PagelAdd A Page
http://www.epicuredigital.com/digitalsigns/moreinfo.html Go DEC FEB APR
9
2003 2004 2005
31 captures
2 Dec 02 - 5 Dec 08
Close
Help
Page 1 of 2Epicure Digital Signage and Menuboards - Info PDFs
3/29/2013http://web.archive.org/web/20040209222416/http:/www.epicuredigital.com/digitalsigns/m...
11a
Page 2 of 2Epicure Digital Signage and Menuboards - Info PDFs
3/29/2013http://web.archive.org/web/20040209222416/http:/www.epicuredigital.com/digitalsigns/m...
http://www.epicuredigital.com/digitalsigns/godigital.html Go OCT DEC APR
4
2002 2003 2004
35 captures
9 Apr 02 - 5 Dec 08
Close
Help
Page 1 of 2Epicure Digital Signage and Menuboards - Go Digital
3/29/2013http://web.archive.org/web/20031204200124/http://www.epicuredigital.com/digitalsigns/g...
IIb
Page 2 of 2Epicure Digital Signage and Menuboards - Go Digital
3/29/2013http://web.archive.org/web/20031204200124/http://www.epicuredigital.com/digitalsigns/g...
http://www.epicuredigital.com/index.html Go OCT DEC OCT
12
2002 2003 2005
20 captures
26 Jan 02 - 5 Nov 08
Close
Help
Page 1 of 2Epicure Digital Signage and Menuboards
3/29/2013http://web.archive.org/web/20031212005644/http://www.epicuredigital.com/index.html
IIc
Page 2 of 2Epicure Digital Signage and Menuboards
3/29/2013http://web.archive.org/web/20031212005644/http://www.epicuredigital.com/index.html
http://www.epicuredigital.com/digitalsigns/menuboards.html Go OCT DEC FEB
4
2002 2003 2004
45 captures
23 Feb 02 - 26 Jul 12
Close
Help
Page 1 of 2Epicure Digital Signage and Menuboards - Signage
3/29/2013http://web.archive.org/web/20031204202120/http://www.epicuredigital.com/digitalsigns/m...
IId
Page 2 of 2Epicure Digital Signage and Menuboards - Signage
3/29/2013http://web.archive.org/web/20031204202120/http://www.epicuredigital.com/digitalsigns/m...
http://www.epicuredigital.com/digitalsigns/company.html Go AUG OCT FEB
2
2002 2003 2004
30 captures
26 Jan 02 - 5 Dec 08
Close
Help
Page 1 of 2Epicure Digital Signage and Menuboards - Benefits
3/29/2013http://web.archive.org/web/20031002091854/http://www.epicuredigital.com/digitalsigns/c...
IIe
Page 2 of 2Epicure Digital Signage and Menuboards - Benefits
3/29/2013http://web.archive.org/web/20031002091854/http://www.epicuredigital.com/digitalsigns/c...
http://www.epicuredigital.com/digitalsigns/system.html Go OCT DEC FEB
4
2002 2003 2004
35 captures
14 Feb 02 - 5 Dec 08
Close
Help
Page 1 of 2Epicure Digital Signage and Menuboards - The System
3/29/2013http://web.archive.org/web/20031204205517/http://www.epicuredigital.com/digitalsigns/s...
IIf
Page 2 of 2Epicure Digital Signage and Menuboards - The System
3/29/2013http://web.archive.org/web/20031204205517/http://www.epicuredigital.com/digitalsigns/s...
http://www.epicuredigital.com/digitalsigns/multimedia.html Go OCT DEC FEB
4
2002 2003 2004
27 captures
5 Jun 02 - 5 Dec 08
Close
Help
Page 1 of 2Epicure Digital Signage and Menuboards - Multimedia
3/29/2013http://web.archive.org/web/20031204203820/http://www.epicuredigital.com/digitalsigns/m...
IIg
Page 2 of 2Epicure Digital Signage and Menuboards - Multimedia
3/29/2013http://web.archive.org/web/20031204203820/http://www.epicuredigital.com/digitalsigns/m...
E P I C U R E D I G I TA L S Y S T E M S , 8 6 6 5 W I L S H I R E B L V D., S T E . 3 0 9, B E V E R L Y H I L L S
C A 9 0 2 11 - W W W. E P I C U R E D I G I T A L . C O M - I N F O @ E P I C U R E D I G I T A L .C O M
8 7 7 - 5 5 3 - 6 3 14 T O L L - F R E E - 3 1 0 - 6 5 2 - 8 2 4 6 V O I C E - 3 1 0 - 6 5 2 - 76 6 3 F A X
TM
©
2
0
0
2
E
P
IC
U
R
E
D
IG
IT
A
L
S
Y
S
T
E
M
S
.
A
LL
R
IG
H
T
S
R
E
S
E
R
V
E
D
.
E P I C U R E D I G I T A L M E N U S Y S T E M
• Change anything quickly
• Animate promotions
• Run TV campaigns
• Supersize promos
• Excite customers and increase sales
• Network all your chain’s menu boards
• Schedule day parts and menu cycles
• Control online or locally
• Download price changes and promos
• Frameless, large-screen rear projection
• Vivid LCDs
• Thin panel plasmas
• High resolution monitors
• Flat screen televisions
• Can be surprisingly affordable
Create a digital signage network in
control of every screen, on every menu
board, in every restaurant. Presenting a
powerful brand experience to a captive
and receptive audience. Customers at
your point-of-sale.
TURN TRADITIONAL MENU BOARDS
INTO A DIGITAL MARKETING MEDIUM
WITH LIVELY MULTIMEDIA
AN ATTENTIVE SERVER
AND STYLISH FLATWARE
IT‘S THE EPICURE DIGITAL MENU SYSTEM™
T H E C U R E
F O R T H E
M E N U B O R E D
IF YOU’RE
MENU BORED
SO ARE YOUR
CUSTOMERS
IIh
E P I C U R E D I G I TA L S Y S T E M S , 8 6 6 5 W I L S H I R E B L V D., S T E . 3 0 9, B E V E R L Y H I L L S
C A 9 0 2 11 - W W W. E P I C U R E D I G I T A L . C O M - I N F O @ E P I C U R E D I G I T A L .C O M
8 7 7 - 5 5 3 - 6 3 14 T O L L - F R E E - 3 1 0 - 6 5 2 - 8 2 4 6 V O I C E - 3 1 0 - 6 5 2 - 76 6 3 F A X
TM
E P I C U R E D I G I T A L M E N U S Y S T E M
©
2
0
0
2
E
P
IC
U
R
E
D
IG
IT
A
L
S
Y
S
T
E
M
S
.
A
LL
R
IG
H
T
S
R
E
S
E
R
V
E
D
.
T H E C U R E
F O R T H E
M E N U B O R E D
LCD
MENU BOARD
LCD PROJECTOR
AND SCREEN
MONITOR
MENU BOARD
REAR PROJECTION
MENU BOARD
LCD
DRIVE-THRU
PLASMA DISPLAYS
ADD-ON:
LCD
POINT-OF-
PURCHASE
APPROXIMATE
DIMENSIONSSPECS
FIVE 19 INCH SCREENS
VERTICALLY INSTALLED
6.25 FEET LONG
EACH SCREEN CABINET
13.5"w x 16.5" h x 2.25"d
EACH SCREEN
12"w x 15"h
FOUR 27 INCH SCREENS
VERTICALLY INSTALLED
6.3 FEET LONG
TWO 43 INCH SCREENS
HORIZONTALLY INSTALLED
6.3 FEET LONG
LG. SCREEN ASPECT RATIO 16:9
EPICURE DIGITAL MIDWAY BOARD
TWO 17 INCH SCREENS
ONE BACKLIT STATIC DISPLAY
40 TO 60 INCH SCREEN
EPICURE DIGITAL POP PEDESTAL,
WALL/POLE MOUNT PLASMA BOARD
VERTICAL OR HORIZONTAL
ORIENTATION
AVAILABLE CONFIGURATIONS:
POLE/WALL MOUNT, COUNTERTOP,
EPICURE DIGITAL REGISTER TOPPER
VERTICAL OR HORIZONTAL
ORIENTATION
FRONT OR REAR PROJECTION
STANDARD & CUSTOM-SIZE SCREENS
LG. SCREEN ASPECT RATIO 16:9 AND
TV ASPECT RATIO 4:3
EACH SCREEN CABINET
38.25"w x 29.5"h x 17"d
EACH SCREEN
38"w x 21.5"h
EACH SCREEN CABINET
19"w x 24"h x 18.5"d
EACH SCREEN
16"w x 21.5"h
EACH CABINET
6' TOWER
EACH SCREEN
16"w x 13"h
42" SCREEN
SCREEN CABINET (HORIZONTAL)
39"w x 23.5"h x 4.5"d
42" SCREEN (HORIZONTAL)
37"w x 21.5"h
SCREEN CABINET (HORIZONTAL)
15"w x 12"h X 2.5"d
SCREEN (HORIZONTAL)
12"w x 9"h
ANY SIZE SCREEN
SOME POPULAR
CONFIGURATIONS
IIi
E P I C U R E D I G I TA L S Y S T E M S , 8 6 6 5 W I L S H I R E B L V D., S T E . 3 0 9, B E V E R L Y H I L L S
C A 9 0 2 11 - W W W. E P I C U R E D I G I T A L . C O M - I N F O @ E P I C U R E D I G I T A L .C O M
8 7 7 - 5 5 3 - 6 3 14 T O L L - F R E E - 3 1 0 - 6 5 2 - 8 2 4 6 V O I C E - 3 1 0 - 6 5 2 - 76 6 3 F A X
T H E C U R E
F O R T H E
M E N U B O R E D
TM
©
2
0
0
2
E
P
IC
U
R
E
D
IG
IT
A
L
S
Y
S
T
E
M
S
.
A
LL
R
IG
H
T
S
R
E
S
E
R
V
E
D
.
E P I C U R E D I G I T A L M E N U S Y S T E M
The world‘s first digital menu boards
for the food service industry.
Ongoing research and development of
this software has led to ten years of
continuous and reliable operation. And
is upgraded as needed to keep current
with the demands of state-of-the-art
digital media.
A customized Apple ® Power Mac™
G4 computer or Windows® 2000/XP
• By day
• Day of week
• Day of month
• Day parts, holidays and menu cycles
• Scaleable from one to 10,000 screens
• Connect via telephone, cable, internet
or satellite
• Download price changes, menus and
promotions
• Remotely from headquarters
• Locally to override scheduling
EPICURE DIGITAL SOFTWARE
EPICURE DIGITAL SERVER
SCHEDULES
NETWORKS
CONTROLS
EPICURE DIGITAL
SOFTWARE
EPICURE DIGITAL
SERVER
IIj
E P I C U R E D I G I TA L S Y S T E M S , 8 6 6 5 W I L S H I R E B L V D., S T E . 3 0 9, B E V E R L Y H I L L S
C A 9 0 2 11 - W W W. E P I C U R E D I G I T A L . C O M - I N F O @ E P I C U R E D I G I T A L .C O M
8 7 7 - 5 5 3 - 6 3 14 T O L L - F R E E - 3 1 0 - 6 5 2 - 8 2 4 6 V O I C E - 3 1 0 - 6 5 2 - 76 6 3 F A X
TM
©
2
0
0
2
E
P
IC
U
R
E
D
IG
IT
A
L
S
Y
S
T
E
M
S
.
A
LL
R
IG
H
T
S
R
E
S
E
R
V
E
D
.
E P I C U R E D I G I T A L M E N U S Y S T E M
• Play animation, video, and billboard-
like banner imagery
• Maximize menu board real estate
with looped multiple messages
• Integrate national, regional, local store
marketing and point-of-purchase
• Minimize non-compliance in the field

• It’s paperless. No waiting weeks
for menu strips, translites and signs
• React quickly to competition and
current events
• Download price changes and promos
• Automate menus by day part
• Schedule promos to match daily
shifting demographics
• Override scheduling with customer and
inventory-sensitive information
• Eliminate printing, shipping and
non-compliance costs
• Excite customers and increase sales
• Reuse existing artwork
• Use Mac ® or PC graphic files.
MARKETING A LA MODEM™
IS THE RIGHT MESSAGE
THE RIGHT TIME
THE RIGHT DEMOGRAPHIC
THE RIGHT PRICE
T H E C U R E
F O R T H E
M E N U B O R E D
THE BEST SELLER
ON A MENU
IS MARKETING
A LA MODEM
IIk
E P I C U R E D I G I TA L S Y S T E M S , 8 6 6 5 W I L S H I R E B L V D., S T E . 3 0 9, B E V E R L Y H I L L S
C A 9 0 2 11 - W W W. E P I C U R E D I G I T A L . C O M - I N F O @ E P I C U R E D I G I T A L .C O M
8 7 7 - 5 5 3 - 6 3 14 T O L L - F R E E - 3 1 0 - 6 5 2 - 8 2 4 6 V O I C E - 3 1 0 - 6 5 2 - 76 6 3 F A X
TM
©
2
0
0
2
E
P
IC
U
R
E
D
IG
IT
A
L
S
Y
S
T
E
M
S
.
A
LL
R
IG
H
T
S
R
E
S
E
R
V
E
D
.
E P I C U R E D I G I T A L M E N U S Y S T E M
Use the popular graphic programs you’re
already using. Turn your existing artwork into
dynamic digital signage. Epicure Digital™
imports standard Mac ® or PC files. Any
computer graphic artist, production house,
or our studio can work with you.
Menus don’t have to stay static. Change
prices quickly online. Play breakfast, lunch
and dinner menus automatically.
Add motion to your promotions. Heighten
emotional impact of your selling message.
Lights, camera, action! Traditional menu
boards have the lights. Digital signage has
the action.
Scale images across multiple screens.
Stretch your imagination and create
powerful imagery.
Our full-service digital production studio
has a lively staf f to keep your digital menu
boards from getting boring.

DIGITAL MENUS CAN EASILY COME ALIVE
CHANGE ANYTHING QUICKLY
ANIMATE A PROMO
RUN A TV CAMPAIGN
SUPERSIZE A PROMO
EPICURE DIGITAL STUDIO SERVICES

LIVELY
MULTIMEDIA
IT’S MISSING
ON YOUR MENU
T H E C U R E
F O R T H E
M E N U B O R E D
happy v
a
2 sp
oons &
any
lentine’s
da
share
the
y larg
e Ice Cr
eam Cu
p
ay
he mom
ent
p only
$3.99

VIDEOANIMATION BANNERS
IIl