Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 18, 2026
Application No. 15/322,392

PARCEL SORTER SYSTEM AND METHOD

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Dec 27, 2016
Examiner
HATCHER, DEIRDRE D
Art Unit
3625
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Ocado Innovation Limited
OA Round
10 (Final)
28%
Grant Probability
At Risk
11-12
OA Rounds
3y 10m
To Grant
53%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 28% of cases
28%
Career Allow Rate
98 granted / 357 resolved
-24.5% vs TC avg
Strong +26% interview lift
Without
With
+25.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 10m
Avg Prosecution
45 currently pending
Career history
402
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
40.0%
+0.0% vs TC avg
§103
37.1%
-2.9% vs TC avg
§102
8.4%
-31.6% vs TC avg
§112
11.9%
-28.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 357 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION This communication is a Non-Final Rejection Office Action in response to the 4/9/2025 submission filled in Application 15/322,392. Claims 1, 2, 22 have been amended. Claims 1-22 are now presented. Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 4/9/2025 has been entered. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments filed 4/9/2025 with respect to the prior art have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the new grounds of rejection that was necessitated by amendment. 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. Claims 1, 2, 20, 21, 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hognaland US 2015/0307276 A1 in view of Olsen US 2005/0252596 A1 in view of “First MultiPick mal sorting solution installed”(hereinafter Cimcorp) in view of Rosenbaum US 20070102329 A1. As per Claim 1 Hognaland teaches a system for managing shipment containers in a shipping network, the system configured for receiving a plurality of stackable storage containers, each stackable storage container being adapted to contain a shipment container, the system comprising: Hognaland para. 4 teaches the storage system 3 comprises a robot 1 which is arranged to move on dedicated supporting rails 13 and to receive a storage bin 2 from a storage column 8 within a bin storing grid 15. The storage system 3 includes a plurality of such robots 1 and a dedicated bin lift device 50, the latter being arranged to receive a storage bin 2 from the robot 1 at the top level of the bin storing grid 15 a storage and retrieval system including: a first framework and a second framework, each framework defining a plurality of adjacent stacks, each stack configured for receiving a plurality of stackable storage containers having a plurality of shipment containers, each stackable storage container being adapted to contain at least one shipment container; the first framework providing a presort of the plurality of shipment containers before transfer of the shipment containers to the second framework; Hognaland para. 33 teaches to illustrate the movement of the robot 1 on the supporting rails 13 constituting the vehicle support 14 some exemplary positions of robots 1 on a grid assembly is illustrated in FIG. 9. The thick arrows drawn in the centre of the robots 1 indicate allowed moving directions. When the robot 1 is situated with its cavity 7 exactly above a central storage column 8a, as is the case for the top left and mid centered robot 1, the arrangement of the supporting rails 13 allow movement in both X and Y directions. Any other positions on the grid assembly restrict the robot's 1 movement on the vehicle support 14 either in X direction (lower right robot 1) or in Y direction (top centered and bottom left robot 1). To allow determination of the robot position it is considered advantageous to equip each robot 1 with one or more position sensors 16, for example optical sensors. Such sensors should 16 preferably be mounted in one or more areas of the robot 1 which ensures that the sensors 16 have both non-obstructed view to the underlying supporting rails 13 and that they pass directly above or close to the positions on the vehicle support 14 in which the rails 13 are crossing. The readings from the sensors 16 may inter alia dictate the further movement of the robot 1 and/or the operation of the vehicle lifting device 9. In the PTAB decision issued on 4/17/2024 the PTAB found “In other words, Hognaland teaches that it is known to have a three dimensional storage grid, including at least a first and a second aluminum column, i.e., frameworks, defining a plurality of adjacent stacks configured to receive stackable containers. Hognaland ¶ 3; see Fig. 1. Hognaland further teaches that the robot can move on the top rails 13 in both the X and Y directions, i.e., moving from one framework to another, retrieving or depositing bins. Id. ¶7. We find that claim 1’s limitation (i) reads on the aforementioned teachings in Hognaland.” tracks arranged above the first and second frameworks to provide access to stackable containers received in the first and second framework; Hognaland para. 3 teaches a remotely operated vehicle for picking up storage bins from a storage system is known. A detailed description of a relevant prior art storage system is given in WO 98/49075. Further, details of a prior art vehicle being suitable for such a storage system is disclosed in Norwegian patent NO317366. More specifically the prior art storage system comprises a three dimensional storage grid containing storage bins that are stacked on top of each other to a certain height. The storage grid is normally constructed as aluminum columns interconnected by top rails. A number of remotely operated vehicles, or robots, are arranged on the top rails. Each vehicle is equipped with a lift for picking up, carrying, and placing bins that are stored inside the storage grid a plurality of robotic pickers/load handlers configured to move on the tracks of the first and second frameworks and to deposit or retrieve selected stackable storage containers to or from the first and second frameworks for sortation and/or dispatch; and Para. 33 teaches to illustrate the movement of the robot 1 on the supporting rails 13 constituting the vehicle support 14 some exemplary positions of robots 1 on a grid assembly is illustrated in FIG. 9. The thick arrows drawn in the centre of the robots 1 indicate allowed moving directions. When the robot 1 is situated with its cavity 7 exactly above a central storage column 8a, as is the case for the top left and mid centered robot 1, the arrangement of the supporting rails 13 allow movement in both X and Y directions. Any other positions on the grid assembly restrict the robot's 1 movement on the vehicle support 14 either in X direction (lower right robot 1) or in Y direction (top centered and bottom left robot 1). To allow determination of the robot position it is considered advantageous to equip each robot 1 with one or more position sensors 16, for example optical sensors. Such sensors should 16 preferably be mounted in one or more areas of the robot 1 which ensures that the sensors 16 have both non-obstructed view to the underlying supporting rails 13 and that they pass directly above or close to the positions on the vehicle support 14 in which the rails 13 are crossing. The readings from the sensors 16 may inter alia dictate the further movement of the robot 1 and/or the operation of the vehicle lifting device 9. In the PTAB decision issued on 4/17/2024 the PTAB found “In other words, Hognaland teaches that it is known to have a three dimensional storage grid, including at least a first and a second aluminum column, i.e., frameworks, defining a plurality of adjacent stacks configured to receive stackable containers. Hognaland ¶ 3; see Fig. 1. Hognaland further teaches that the robot can move on the top rails 13 in both the X and Y directions, i.e., moving from one framework to another, retrieving or depositing bins. Id. ¶7. We find that claim 1’s limitation (i) reads on the aforementioned teachings in Hognaland.” at least one processor configured to: receive or access destination address information for each of the plurality of shipment containers entering the system; generate signals for instructing at least one of the plurality of robotic pickers to retrieve the at least one selected shipment container for dispatch to the second framework, wherein the rearranging of the selected stackable storage containers and the selection of the at least one shipment containers for dispatch are based on: the plurality of selected shipment containers being dispatched to a same destination address or a same other geographic location in the shipping network; and wherein upon selection of the at least one shipment containers, the at least one processor is configured to control the retrieval from one of the plurality of stacks in the framework at least one stackable storage container containing the at least one selected shipment containers according to the sequence required for delivery In the PTAB decision issued on 4/17/2024 the PTAB found “Regarding claim 1’s limitations (iv), (v), (viii), (ix), (xi), and (xiii) (which are directed towards using a processor to rearrange the containers), we find that such limitations read on the following teachings in Hognaland: (1) “a robot assembly where the body 4 is completely covered by an enclosing cover 73 comprising handles 74 and transmission means/control panel 75” (Hognaland § 30); and (2) “All operations of the robot | are controlled by wireless communications means 75 and remote control units. This includes control of the robot movement, the vehicle lifting device and the position measurements” (id. § 34). In other words, Hognaland teaches a controller, 1.e., a processor, configured to send wireless signals to the robot to retrieve containers for dispatch to other locations, either within the storage system or external thereto. Cimcorp and Olsen also cumulatively teaches rapid sorting techniques.” Hognaland does not explicitly disclose a shipment priority of the selected shipment containers; However, Olsen para. 45 teaches a package is received at an origin facility 15 for delivery to a destination address 30. Shipping indicia is captured from the package, which, in this example, is the destination zip code and service level of the package. If the destination zip code is outside the delivery area 19 for the origin facility 15, the sort assist system 40 uses the package destination zip code and service level to select a sort plan for the package. The Examiner considers the service level to be the shipment priority. a filling of capacity in a shipping vehicle on which the selected shipment containers are to be dispatched; and However, Olsen para. 77 teaches FIG. 9 shows a process flow that illustrates how a planned route for a package can be changed on the fly to respond to changed conditions. At step 200, the package is assigned a first sort plan. A change in condition occurs at step 205. As will be recognized by those skilled in the art, changes in condition can include, without limitation, traffic congestion, insufficient delivery vehicle capacity, insufficient sorting location capacity, road construction, and seasonal volume fluctuations. In response to a change in condition, and while the package is in route in the delivery network, the carrier changes the sort plan at step 210. Both Hognaland and Olsen are drawn to storage and retrieval. Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the Applicant’s invention to modify the teaching of Hognaland to include a retrieval sequence is based on a priority of the selected shipment containers and a filling of capacity in a shipping vehicle on which the selected shipment containers are to be dispatched as taught by Olsen because service level and vehicle capacity are well recognized factors that must be considered when optimizing a supply chain. Using these factors as inputs when considering retrieval and load sequencing in a robotic retrieval process ensures packages reach destinations on time and trucks are fully utilized. Hognaland does not explicitly disclose identify a period in which the plurality of robotic pickers/load handlers are available for rearranging one or more of the selected stackable storage containers in the first framework; generate signals for instructing at least one of the plurality of robotic pickers to rearrange the selected stackable storage containers into one or more proximate stacks in the first framework, wherein the storage containers of each group are rearranged into the one or more proximate stacks according to a specified sequence for dispatch to the second framework which is at a second geographic location outside a first geographic location of the first framework;; However, Cimcorp page 9 (Rapid Sorting Section) teaches MultiPick robots sort the trays into stacks according to characteristics such as type (sorted or unsorted), class (first or second) and destination (sorting centers or zip code). Trays return to the MultiPick area after the first sorting stage (outward sorting, to other sorting centers) and the second sorting stage (inward sorting, for the local area).The MultiPick system can handle trays arriving in any order, arranging them in stacks according to dispatch sequence. The destination-specific stacks are ready to be loaded into transport units. When a vehicle load of mail is ready for dispatch, a MultiPick robot transfers the trays to roll containers or dollies, which are wheeled to a marshaling area or directly into the delivery vehicle. Cimcorp further teaches MultiPick works flexibly to meet demand. The robots store unsequenced stacks of trays until they are needed, relieving pressure on the conveyor system. Once peaks have been cleared, MultiPick can return to sequencing trays, ready for further processing. The MultiPick solution allows storage and sequencing operations to take place in the same area, with storage of trays in stacks ensuring optimum space utilization. Floor-based storage allows easy cleaning and maintenance when required, as well as manual access to all trays in the event of malfunction. Sorting and sequencing of stacks in the MultiPick area means that mail required for dispatch can be retrieved from storage and loaded into delivery vehicles rapidly, enabling postal operators to meet their tight loading windows. Further, the Examiner has applied the broadest reasonable interpretation to the terms a second geographic location outside a first geographic location of the first framework. The Examiner interprets this to mean that the frameworks are in different locations in a facility. Both Hognaland and Cimcorp are drawn to automated warehouse operations. Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the Applicant’s invention to modify the teaching of Hognaland to include identify a period in which the plurality of robotic pickers/load handlers are available for rearranging one or more of the selected stackable storage containers in the first framework; generate signals for instructing at least one of the plurality of robotic pickers to rearrange the selected stackable storage containers into one or more proximate stacks in the first framework, wherein the storage containers of each group are rearranged into the one or more proximate stacks; according to a specified sequence for dispatch to the second framework which is at a second geographic location outside a first geographic location of the first framework as taught by Cimcorp to ensure that packages required for dispatch can be retrieved from storage and loaded into delivery vehicles rapidly, enabling operators to meet their tight loading windows (as suggested by Cimcorp “Fast vehicle loading” section). Hognaland does not explicitly disclose considering a total delivery time for a last leg vehicle based on destinations of the selected shipment containers and travel times between the destinations; However, Rosenbaum teaches [0003] Parcels are delivered by public and private concerns, including national post offices like the United States Postal Service and corporate delivery services like Federal Express and DHL. Parcels arrive at a central location and are distributed to delivery vehicles which will complete the last leg of the parcels journey to the delivery address. Delivery vehicle drivers usually wait for their parcels by a conveyor belt or the like. It is the driver responsibility to note the delivery addresses of the parcels, plan a delivery route according to the addresses, and load the delivery vehicle in an ordered manner such that parcels can be later retrieved. These tasks are time consuming, tedious, stressful and prone to human error. Where an error is made with a parcel, the driver must redirect his route and/or a delay occurs in parcel delivery. As with all businesses, the pressures on the driver are passed to the delivery service which is ever mindful of balancing quality, customer service and costs while providing additional services like alternate delivery addresses--yet another consideration for the driver. Accordingly, a need exists for tools to assist the driver and delivery service with the aforementioned burdens. [0004] It is an advantage of the present invention to relieve the driver of the burdens of sorting and loading parcels as well as generating a manifest and planning a delivery route. It is a further advantage to free up the driver's preparation time so that more time is available for deliveries and customer service. It is a further advantage to provide the delivery service with a delivery preparation scheme having reduced error while mindful of alternative delivery services. These and other advantages are realized by a system and method for automatically sorting parcels as they are loaded onto delivery trucks, generating and updating parcel manifests, and optimizing delivery routes. In operation, an identifier or parcel information, such an identification (ID) code and/or delivery address, is read off of a parcel by scanning as the parcel is conveyed to a loading rack. The parcel is sequentially loaded into a sequential position within the rack. Once a rack is full, or no more parcels are present for delivery, the rack is loaded onto a delivery vehicle. Parcel identifiers or information is matched to a sorting code. The. resulting match (or assignment) list is then stored in at least one database. The sorting code is a unique code identifying a unique delivery address. Consideration is also given to preexisting arrangements present for the parcel's delivery--such as an alternate address which is substituted into the parcel data. A search is performed of the match list for delivery addresses along a particular delivery route. A hit list is generated which is then sorted, e.g. by routing software, to an order consistent with a time optimized delivery route. A manifest is then generated with the sorted hit list and other information. [0018] A determination is made whether the mobile rack is full 184. If the rack is full 186, the rack is loaded onto the delivery truck and a new rack is introduced to receive parcels 188. And the method continues to step 190. If the rack is not full 192, the method continues to step 190, wherein, a determination is made whether there are other parcels to be delivered along the route of the delivery vehicle. If other parcels are present 194, the method returns to step 102 and the next parcel is scanned. If there are no more parcels to be scanned 196, the at least one database will now contain a list of all of the scanned parcels sorted by sort code. The at least one database is now queried for a list of all parcels matching select sort codes (or delivery addresses0, the select sort codes being along a particular delivery route 198. A hit list is generated and sorted and produced in a manifest with the aid of routing software 200. The hit list may be ordered such that the driver's stops are minimized along a select route. The routing software is known in the art. The hit list will contain at least a rack location, delivery address and order of delivery (50, FIG. 6). The manifest is stored in the at least one database 202 and communicated to the delivery vehicle driver via paper or electronic format 204. An optional map detailing the route and delivery may also be provided. The latter instance, the driver is equipped with a mobile data receiving device such as a personal digital assistant, mobile telephone and the like. The method then ends 206. Hognaland, Olsen, Cimcorp and Rosenbaum are drawn to delivering parcels. Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the Applicant’s invention to modify the teachings of Hognaland to include considering a total delivery time for a last leg vehicle based on destinations of the selected shipment containers and travel times between the destinations as taught by Rosenbaum to automatically sort parcels as they are loaded onto delivery trucks, generating and updating parcel manifests, and optimizing delivery routes (see para. 40). As per Claim 2 Hognaland teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the plurality of robotic pickers is configured to transport the retrieved stackable storage containers for dispatch via at least one of a plurality of transfer points at the storage-and-retrieval system. Hognaland para. 7 teaches in particular, one or more embodiments of the present invention relate to a remotely operated vehicle or robot for picking up storage bins from a storage system. The inventive vehicle or robot comprises a vehicle body, which vehicle body further comprises a first section for storing vehicle driving means and a second section for receiving any storage bin stored in a storage column within the storage system, a vehicle lifting device which is at least indirectly connected to the vehicle body in order to lift the storage bin into the second section, a first set of vehicle rolling means connected to the vehicle body in order to allow movement of the vehicle along a first direction (X) within the storage system during use and a second set of vehicle rolling means connected to the vehicle body in order to allow movement of the vehicle along a second direction (Y) in the storage system during use. The second direction (Y) is oriented perpendicular to the first direction (X). As per Claim 20 Hognaland teaches the system of claim 1 wherein the tracks comprise: two substantially perpendicular sets of rails forming a grid above the stacks of stackable containers. Hognaland para. 3 teaches a remotely operated vehicle for picking up storage bins from a storage system is known. A detailed description of a relevant prior art storage system is given in WO 98/49075. Further, details of a prior art vehicle being suitable for such a storage system is disclosed in Norwegian patent NO317366. More specifically the prior art storage system comprises a three dimensional storage grid containing storage bins that are stacked on top of each other to a certain height. The storage grid is normally constructed as aluminum columns interconnected by top rails. A number of remotely operated vehicles, or robots, are arranged on the top rails. Each vehicle is equipped with a lift for picking up, carrying, and placing bins that are stored inside the storage grid. As per Claim 21 Hognaland teaches the system of claim 20, wherein the robotic pickers/load handlers comprise: a body mounted on wheels, a first set of the wheels being arranged to engage with at least two rails of a first set of the rails, the second set of the wheels being arranged to engage with at least two rails of a second set of the rails, the first set of wheels being independently moveable and driveable with respect to the second set of wheels such that when in motion only one set of wheels is engaged with the grid at any one time thereby enabling movement of the robotic pickers/load handling devices along the rails to any point on the grid by driving only a set of wheels engaged with the rails. Hognaland para. 29 and Fig. 3 teaches FIGS. 3 and 4 gives a perspective view in two different angles of the inventive robot 1 comprising a rectangular vehicle body or framework 4 with a cavity 7 centrally arranged within the body 4, a top lid 72 covering the top part of the body 4, a first set of four wheels 10 mounted inside the cavity 7 and in parallel to the interior walls of the body 4 and a second set of four wheels 11 mounted in parallel to the exterior walls of the body 4. The first and second set of wheels 10,11 are oriented perpendicular to each other. Further, the vehicle body 4 also includes side parts 5,5a,5b arranged on both sides of the cavity 7 along at least one of the robots 1 direction of movements. For the sake of clarity a Cartesian coordinate system is shown with its X, Y and Z axes aligned along the principal directions of the rectangular vehicle body 4. As per Claim 22 Hognaland teaches a method of sorting items in a system for managing shipment containers, the system having: a storage-and-retrieval system having: a first framework and second framework, each framework defining a plurality of adjacent stacks, each stack being configured for receiving a plurality of stackable storage containers, each stackable storage container being suitable for containing at least one shipment container; Hognaland para. 33 teaches to illustrate the movement of the robot 1 on the supporting rails 13 constituting the vehicle support 14 some exemplary positions of robots 1 on a grid assembly is illustrated in FIG. 9. The thick arrows drawn in the centre of the robots 1 indicate allowed moving directions. When the robot 1 is situated with its cavity 7 exactly above a central storage column 8a, as is the case for the top left and mid centered robot 1, the arrangement of the supporting rails 13 allow movement in both X and Y directions. Any other positions on the grid assembly restrict the robot's 1 movement on the vehicle support 14 either in X direction (lower right robot 1) or in Y direction (top centered and bottom left robot 1). To allow determination of the robot position it is considered advantageous to equip each robot 1 with one or more position sensors 16, for example optical sensors. Such sensors should 16 preferably be mounted in one or more areas of the robot 1 which ensures that the sensors 16 have both non-obstructed view to the underlying supporting rails 13 and that they pass directly above or close to the positions on the vehicle support 14 in which the rails 13 are crossing. The readings from the sensors 16 may inter alia dictate the further movement of the robot 1 and/or the operation of the vehicle lifting device 9. In the PTAB decision issued on 4/17/2024 the PTAB found “In other words, Hognaland teaches that it is known to have a three dimensional storage grid, including at least a first and a second aluminum column, i.e., frameworks, defining a plurality of adjacent stacks configured to receive stackable containers. Hognaland ¶ 3; see Fig. 1. Hognaland further teaches that the robot can move on the top rails 13 in both the X and Y directions, i.e., moving from one framework to another, retrieving or depositing bins. Id. ¶7. We find that claim 1’s limitation (i) reads on the aforementioned teachings in Hognaland.” tracks arranged above the first and second frameworks to provide access to stackable containers received in the first and second framework;(Hognaland para. 3 teaches a remotely operated vehicle for picking up storage bins from a storage system is known. A detailed description of a relevant prior art storage system is given in WO 98/49075. Further, details of a prior art vehicle being suitable for such a storage system is disclosed in Norwegian patent NO317366. More specifically the prior art storage system comprises a three dimensional storage grid containing storage bins that are stacked on top of each other to a certain height. The storage grid is normally constructed as aluminum columns interconnected by top rails. A number of remotely operated vehicles, or robots, are arranged on the top rails. Each vehicle is equipped with a lift for picking up, carrying, and placing bins that are stored inside the storage grid a plurality of robotic pickers/load handlers configured to move on the tracks of the first and second frameworks and to deposit or retrieve selected stackable storage containers to or from the first and second frameworks for sortation and/or dispatch and (Para. 33 teaches to illustrate the movement of the robot 1 on the supporting rails 13 constituting the vehicle support 14 some exemplary positions of robots 1 on a grid assembly is illustrated in FIG. 9. The thick arrows drawn in the centre of the robots 1 indicate allowed moving directions. When the robot 1 is situated with its cavity 7 exactly above a central storage column 8a, as is the case for the top left and mid centered robot 1, the arrangement of the supporting rails 13 allow movement in both X and Y directions. Any other positions on the grid assembly restrict the robot's 1 movement on the vehicle support 14 either in X direction (lower right robot 1) or in Y direction (top centered and bottom left robot 1). To allow determination of the robot position it is considered advantageous to equip each robot 1 with one or more position sensors 16, for example optical sensors. Such sensors should 16 preferably be mounted in one or more areas of the robot 1 which ensures that the sensors 16 have both non-obstructed view to the underlying supporting rails 13 and that they pass directly above or close to the positions on the vehicle support 14 in which the rails 13 are crossing. The readings from the sensors 16 may inter alia dictate the further movement of the robot 1 and/or the operation of the vehicle lifting device 9. In the PTAB decision issued on 4/17/2024 the PTAB found “In other words, Hognaland teaches that it is known to have a three dimensional storage grid, including at least a first and a second aluminum column, i.e., frameworks, defining a plurality of adjacent stacks configured to receive stackable containers. Hognaland ¶ 3; see Fig. 1. Hognaland further teaches that the robot can move on the top rails 13 in both the X and Y directions, i.e., moving from one framework to another, retrieving or depositing bins. Id. ¶7. We find that claim 1’s limitation (i) reads on the aforementioned teachings in Hognaland.”) at least one processor, the method comprising: receiving or accessing, by the at least on processor, destination address information for each of the plurality of shipment containers entering the system; generating, by the at least one processor, signals for instructing at least one of the plurality of robotic pickers to rearrange the selected stackable storage containers wherein the storage containers of each group are rearranged according to a specified sequence for dispatch; generating, by at least one processor signals for instructing at least one of the plurality of pickers to retrieve the at least one or more shipment containers to the second framework wherein the rearranging of the selected stackable storage containers and the selection of the at least one shipment containers for dispatch are based on: the plurality of selected shipment containers being dispatched to a same destination address or a same other geographic location in the shipping network; and wherein upon selection of the at least on shipment container, the method comprising: controlling the retrieval from one or more of the plurality of stacks in the second framework, at least one stackable storage container containing the at least one selected shipment containers according to the sequence required for delivery of the selected shipment. In the PTAB decision issued on 4/17/2024 the PTAB found “Regarding claim 1’s limitations (iv), (v), (viii), (ix), (xi), and (xiii) (which are directed towards using a processor to rearrange the containers), we find that such limitations read on the following teachings in Hognaland: (1) “a robot assembly where the body 4 is completely covered by an enclosing cover 73 comprising handles 74 and transmission means/control panel 75” (Hognaland § 30); and (2) “All operations of the robot | are controlled by wireless communications means 75 and remote control units. This includes control of the robot movement, the vehicle lifting device and the position measurements” (id. § 34). In other words, Hognaland teaches a controller, 1.e., a processor, configured to send wireless signals to the robot to retrieve containers for dispatch to other locations, either within the storage system or external thereto. Cimcorp and Olsen also cumulatively teaches rapid sorting techniques.” Hognaland does not explicitly disclose a shipment priority of the selected shipment containers; and However, Olsen para. 45 teaches a package is received at an origin facility 15 for delivery to a destination address 30. Shipping indicia is captured from the package, which, in this example, is the destination zip code and service level of the package. If the destination zip code is outside the delivery area 19 for the origin facility 15, the sort assist system 40 uses the package destination zip code and service level to select a sort plan for the package. The Examiner considers the service level to be the shipment priority. a filling capacity of a shipping vehicle on which the selected shipment containers are to be dispatched; However, Olsen para. 77 teaches FIG. 9 shows a process flow that illustrates how a planned route for a package can be changed on the fly to respond to changed conditions. At step 200, the package is assigned a first sort plan. A change in condition occurs at step 205. As will be recognized by those skilled in the art, changes in condition can include, without limitation, traffic congestion, insufficient delivery vehicle capacity, insufficient sorting location capacity, road construction, and seasonal volume fluctuations. In response to a change in condition, and while the package is in route in the delivery network, the carrier changes the sort plan at step 210. Both R Hognaland and Olsen are drawn to storage and retrieval. Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the Applicant’s invention to modify the teaching of Hognaland to include a retrieval sequence is based on a priority of the selected shipment containers and a filling of capacity in a shipping vehicle on which the selected shipment containers are to be dispatched as taught by Olsen because service level and vehicle capacity are well recognized factors that must be considered when optimizing a supply chain. Using these factors as inputs when considering retrieval and load sequencing in a robotic retrieval process ensures packages reach destinations on time and trucks are fully utilized. Hognaland does not explicitly disclose identifying, by at least one processor, a period in which the plurality of robotic pickers/load handlers are available for rearranging one or more of the selected stackable storage containers in the first framework; generating, by the at least one processor, signals for instructing at least one of the plurality of robotic pickers to rearrange the selected stackable storage containers into one or more proximate stacks in the first framework, wherein the storage containers of each group are rearranged into the one or more proximate stacks according to a specified sequence for dispatch to the second framework which is at a second geographic location outside a first geographic location of the first framework However, Cimcorp page 9 (Rapid Sorting Section) teaches MultiPick robots sort the trays into stacks according to characteristics such as type (sorted or unsorted), class (first or second) and destination (sorting centers or zip code). Trays return to the MultiPick area after the first sorting stage (outward sorting, to other sorting centers) and the second sorting stage (inward sorting, for the local area).The MultiPick system can handle trays arriving in any order, arranging them in stacks according to dispatch sequence. The destination-specific stacks are ready to be loaded into transport units. When a vehicle load of mail is ready for dispatch, a MultiPick robot transfers the trays to roll containers or dollies, which are wheeled to a marshaling area or directly into the delivery vehicle. Cimcorp further teaches MultiPick works flexibly to meet demand. The robots store unsequenced stacks of trays until they are needed, relieving pressure on the conveyor system. Once peaks have been cleared, MultiPick can return to sequencing trays, ready for further processing. The MultiPick solution allows storage and sequencing operations to take place in the same area, with storage of trays in stacks ensuring optimum space utilization. Floor-based storage allows easy cleaning and maintenance when required, as well as manual access to all trays in the event of malfunction. Sorting and sequencing of stacks in the MultiPick area means that mail required for dispatch can be retrieved from storage and loaded into delivery vehicles rapidly, enabling postal operators to meet their tight loading windows. Further, the Examiner has applied the broadest reasonable interpretation to the terms a second geographic location outside a first geographic location of the first framework. The Examiner interprets this to mean that the frameworks are in different locations in a facility. Both Hognaland and Cimcorp are drawn to automated warehouse operations. Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the Applicant’s invention to modify the teaching of Hognaland to include identifying, by at least one processor, a period in which the plurality of robotic pickers/load handlers are available for rearranging one or more of the selected stackable storage containers in the first framework; generating, by the at least one processor, signals for instructing at least one of the plurality of robotic pickers to rearrange the selected stackable storage containers into one or more proximate stacks in the first framework, wherein the storage containers of each group are rearranged into the one or more proximate stacks according to a specified sequence for dispatch to the second framework which is at a second geographic location outside a first geographic location of the first framework as taught by Cimcorp to ensure that packages required for dispatch can be retrieved from storage and loaded into delivery vehicles rapidly, enabling operators to meet their tight loading windows (as suggested by Cimcorp “Fast vehicle loading” section). Hognaland does not explicitly disclose considering a total delivery time for a last leg vehicle based on destinations of the selected shipment containers and travel times between the destinations; However, Rosenbaum teaches [0003] Parcels are delivered by public and private concerns, including national post offices like the United States Postal Service and corporate delivery services like Federal Express and DHL. Parcels arrive at a central location and are distributed to delivery vehicles which will complete the last leg of the parcels journey to the delivery address. Delivery vehicle drivers usually wait for their parcels by a conveyor belt or the like. It is the driver responsibility to note the delivery addresses of the parcels, plan a delivery route according to the addresses, and load the delivery vehicle in an ordered manner such that parcels can be later retrieved. These tasks are time consuming, tedious, stressful and prone to human error. Where an error is made with a parcel, the driver must redirect his route and/or a delay occurs in parcel delivery. As with all businesses, the pressures on the driver are passed to the delivery service which is ever mindful of balancing quality, customer service and costs while providing additional services like alternate delivery addresses--yet another consideration for the driver. Accordingly, a need exists for tools to assist the driver and delivery service with the aforementioned burdens. [0004] It is an advantage of the present invention to relieve the driver of the burdens of sorting and loading parcels as well as generating a manifest and planning a delivery route. It is a further advantage to free up the driver's preparation time so that more time is available for deliveries and customer service. It is a further advantage to provide the delivery service with a delivery preparation scheme having reduced error while mindful of alternative delivery services. These and other advantages are realized by a system and method for automatically sorting parcels as they are loaded onto delivery trucks, generating and updating parcel manifests, and optimizing delivery routes. In operation, an identifier or parcel information, such an identification (ID) code and/or delivery address, is read off of a parcel by scanning as the parcel is conveyed to a loading rack. The parcel is sequentially loaded into a sequential position within the rack. Once a rack is full, or no more parcels are present for delivery, the rack is loaded onto a delivery vehicle. Parcel identifiers or information is matched to a sorting code. The. resulting match (or assignment) list is then stored in at least one database. The sorting code is a unique code identifying a unique delivery address. Consideration is also given to preexisting arrangements present for the parcel's delivery--such as an alternate address which is substituted into the parcel data. A search is performed of the match list for delivery addresses along a particular delivery route. A hit list is generated which is then sorted, e.g. by routing software, to an order consistent with a time optimized delivery route. A manifest is then generated with the sorted hit list and other information. [0018] A determination is made whether the mobile rack is full 184. If the rack is full 186, the rack is loaded onto the delivery truck and a new rack is introduced to receive parcels 188. And the method continues to step 190. If the rack is not full 192, the method continues to step 190, wherein, a determination is made whether there are other parcels to be delivered along the route of the delivery vehicle. If other parcels are present 194, the method returns to step 102 and the next parcel is scanned. If there are no more parcels to be scanned 196, the at least one database will now contain a list of all of the scanned parcels sorted by sort code. The at least one database is now queried for a list of all parcels matching select sort codes (or delivery addresses0, the select sort codes being along a particular delivery route 198. A hit list is generated and sorted and produced in a manifest with the aid of routing software 200. The hit list may be ordered such that the driver's stops are minimized along a select route. The routing software is known in the art. The hit list will contain at least a rack location, delivery address and order of delivery (50, FIG. 6). The manifest is stored in the at least one database 202 and communicated to the delivery vehicle driver via paper or electronic format 204. An optional map detailing the route and delivery may also be provided. The latter instance, the driver is equipped with a mobile data receiving device such as a personal digital assistant, mobile telephone and the like. The method then ends 206. Hognaland, Olsen, Cimcorp and Rosenbaum are drawn to delivering parcels. Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the Applicant’s invention to modify the teachings of Hognaland to include considering a total delivery time for a last leg vehicle based on destinations of the selected shipment containers and travel times between the destinations as taught by Rosenbaum to automatically sort parcels as they are loaded onto delivery trucks, generating and updating parcel manifests, and optimizing delivery routes (see para. 40). Claims 3, 4, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hognaland US 2015/0307276 A1 in view of Olsen US 2005/0252596 A1 in view of “First MultiPick mal sorting solution installed”(hereinafter Cimcorp) in view of Rosenbaum US 20070102329 A1 and in further view of Razumov US 2015/0225187 A1. As per Claim 3 Hognaland does not teach the system of claim 1, wherein the plurality of robotic pickers or a second plurality of pickers are configured for inducting shipment containers into the storage-and-retrieval system via at least one of a plurality of transfer points at the storage-and-retrieval system. However, Razumov para. 62 teaches due to ability of transportation devices to move the platform 106 up and down in a horizontal direction, adjacent transportation devices arranged at the same passage between storage racks can simultaneously operate with containers arranged at the same row. For example, the transportation device A1 may load one or more container from a row in the storage section 12. At the same time, the transportation device A2 may unload one or more containers to the same row. To avoid interference between the transportation devices A1 and A2 when both of them cross the same point, the platform 106 of the transportation device A1 may be moved down and/or the platform 106 of the transportation device A2 may be moved up. As a result, the storage system 10 can provide a high-speed transfer of containers from any slot of the storage racks to another slot in a selected row of the storage racks accessible to the container carriage 22. Both Hognaland and Razumov are drawn to storage and retrieval. Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the Applicant’s invention to modify the teachings of Hognaland to include wherein the plurality of robotic pickers or a second plurality of pickers are configured for inducting shipment containers into the storage-and-retrieval system via at least one of a plurality of transfer points at the storage-and-retrieval system as taught by Razumov to perform in-storage transfer operations in a quick and efficient manner (see para. 5). As per Claim 4 Hognaland does not teach the system of claim 1, wherein the selection of the shipment containers is based on at least one of: a weight and at least one dimension of at least one of the shipment containers. However, Razumov para. 8 teaches also, an order may include multiple products that should be packed in a specific sequence. For example, heavy products need to be placed at the bottom of the container, while lightweight products may be placed after the heavy products. In this case, to efficiently fulfill the order, it would be desirable to deliver containers with the heavy products before containers with the lightweight products. Both Hognaland and Razumov are drawn to storage and retrieval. Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the Applicant’s invention to modify the teachings of Hognaland to include wherein the selection of the shipment containers is based on at least one of: a weight and at least one dimension of at least one of the shipment containers as taught by Razumov to more efficiently fulfill an order, by delivering containers with the heavy products before containers with the lightweight products (see para. 8). As per Claim 9 Hognaland does not teach the system of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to generate signals for instructing at least two of the plurality of robotic pickers to concurrently retrieve selected shipment containers for dispatch via different shipping vehicles. However, Razumov para. 7 teaches during an order processing procedure when multiple orders are fulfilled at the same time, different orders may require collection of products from different containers. To increase the efficiency of the order fulfillment and the throughput of the storage system, it would be desirable to deliver containers to a picking area in a predefined sequence so as to enable a picking device or operator to pick products required to fulfill processed orders sequentially. Further, trucks used for shipping orders from a warehouse or fulfillment center should be loaded in accordance with order destinations so as to make it possible to unload containers delivered to closer destinations without unloading the remaining containers from the truck. In this case, it would be desirable to transfer containers to truck loading ports in an order determined by containers' destinations. Further, fig. 34-35 teach an example of a sequencing procedure of the present disclosure performed using multiple container carriages operating concurrently. Both Hognaland and Razumov are drawn to storage and retrieval. Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the Applicant’s invention to modify the teachings of Hognaland to include wherein the at least one processor is configured to generate signals for instructing at least two of the plurality of robotic pickers to concurrently retrieve selected shipment containers for dispatch via different shipping vehicles as taught by Razumov to increase the efficiency of the order fulfillment and the throughput of the storage system (see para. 7). As per Claim 10 Hognaland does not teach the system of claim 1 wherein the at least one processor is configured to select shipment containers for dispatch in a specific sequence. Attorney's Docket No. - However, Razumov para. 9
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 27, 2016
Application Filed
Dec 27, 2016
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 24, 2019
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Oct 28, 2019
Response Filed
Jan 27, 2020
Final Rejection — §103
Apr 06, 2020
Interview Requested
Apr 29, 2020
Applicant Interview
Apr 29, 2020
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jun 02, 2020
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 01, 2020
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 30, 2020
Request for Continued Examination
Aug 05, 2020
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 26, 2021
Non-Final Rejection — §103
May 24, 2021
Response Filed
Jun 10, 2021
Final Rejection — §103
Sep 15, 2021
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 20, 2021
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 15, 2021
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 16, 2021
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 18, 2021
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Mar 22, 2022
Interview Requested
Mar 29, 2022
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Apr 22, 2022
Response Filed
May 09, 2022
Examiner Interview Summary
Jul 26, 2022
Final Rejection — §103
Sep 29, 2022
Notice of Allowance
Sep 29, 2022
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 08, 2022
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 16, 2022
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 09, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 07, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 09, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 09, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 13, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 14, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 14, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 01, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 12, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 15, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 27, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 20, 2024
Response Filed
Jan 15, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Apr 09, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jun 05, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 13, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Sep 26, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 18, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Mar 17, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Apr 01, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12591902
METHOD FOR PREDICTING BUSINESS PERFORMANCE USING MACHINE LEARNING AND APPARATUS USING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12572867
DIGITAL PROCESSING SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR MANAGING WORKFLOWS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12536488
DETERMINING MACHINE LEARNING MODEL ANOMALIES AND IMPACT ON BUSINESS OUTPUT DATA
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12530703
DELIVERY OF DATA-DRIVEN & CROSS-PLATFORM EXPERIENCES BASED ON BEHAVIORAL COHORTS & IDENTITY RESOLUTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12462210
Performance Measuring System Measuring Sustainable Development Relevant Properties Of An Object, and Method Thereof
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 04, 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

11-12
Expected OA Rounds
28%
Grant Probability
53%
With Interview (+25.9%)
3y 10m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 357 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