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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 01/07/2026 has been entered.
Status of Claims
This non-final office action is responsive to Applicant’s submission filed 01/07/2026. Currently, claims 22-38 are pending. Claims 22-38 are newly added. Claims 1-21 have been cancelled.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 21-38 are allowed over prior art.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
None of the relevant patent and non-patent prior art, in single or in combination, teaches the combination:
“intercepting, by an express delivery station among the plurality of express delivery stations, the package successfully, in-warehousing an item in the package into the express delivery station, and sending virtual warehouse location in-warehouse information to the electronic device, wherein the express delivery station is used as a virtual warehouse location in a main warehouse where an item is initially ex-warehoused, and the virtual warehouse location is distinct from an entity warehouse location in the main warehouse and is managed by the warehouse management system; and
receiving, by the electronic device, the generation instruction from the user terminal, in response to determining that the second item acquisition task comprises the item according to a category and a number of at least one item in the second item acquisition task, and determining that a package transportation route corresponding to the second item acquisition task comprises the express delivery station according to a delivery address in the second item acquisition task, ex-warehousing the item from the virtual warehouse location, and associating the item in the virtual warehouse location and virtual warehouse location ex-warehouse information of the item with the second item acquisition task”,
as recited in claims 22, 30 and 38.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 22-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to judicial exception (i.e., abstract idea) without significantly more.
The claims recite method, apparatus and computer program product for managing an order fulfillment and delivery process.
Exemplary claim 22 recites in part,
“receiving, by a user terminal, a user input, generating a cancel instruction of a first item acquisition task, and sending the cancel instruction to an electronic device capable of running a warehouse management system, wherein the first item acquisition task is a shopping order; (receiving a cancel input)
receiving, by the electronic device, the cancel instruction from the user terminal, and in response to determining that a package corresponding to the first item acquisition task is in an undelivered state, notifying a plurality of express delivery stations to intercept the package; (receiving and transmitting the cancel input to other devices)
intercepting, by an express delivery station among the plurality of express delivery stations, the package successfully, in-warehousing an item in the package into the express delivery station, and sending virtual warehouse location in-warehouse information to the electronic device…; (holding the item at a delivery station (virtually) as defined by the warehouse system)
receiving and recording, by the electronic device, the virtual warehouse location in- warehouse information from the express delivery station; (transmitting and receiving virtual warehouse information)
generating, by the user terminal, a generation instruction of a second item acquisition task, and sending the generation instruction to the electronic device, wherein the second item acquisition task is another shopping order distinct from the first item acquisition task; and (receiving a user order input)
receiving, by the electronic device, the generation instruction from the user terminal, in response to determining that the second item acquisition task comprises the item according to a category and a number of at least one item in the second item acquisition task, and determining that a package transportation route corresponding to the second item acquisition task comprises the express delivery station according to a delivery address in the second item acquisition task, ex-warehousing the item from the virtual warehouse location, and associating the item in the virtual warehouse location and virtual warehouse location ex-warehouse information of the item with the second item acquisition task.” (identifying item at delivery station as corresponding to item in new user order)
The above limitations describe the steps of, 1) receiving an order cancellation and determining an item delivery state, 2) transmitting intercept notification, 3) receiving and storing package delivery information based on notification response, 4) processing the package based on new user input (order information), and 5) linking the package with new user input.
The recited steps describe the process of managing an order fulfillment and delivery process. The above limitations, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, encompass "Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity (commercial or legal interactions - sales activities or behavior/business relations)" enumerated in MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II)(B). If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers commercial or legal interactions, then it falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the cited claim recites additional elements in the form of computer elements (electronic device, user terminal) to implement the limitations encompassing the abstract idea identified above. The recited computer elements represent using a computer as a tool to perform the judicial exception as in MPEP 2106.05(f). In addition, the claim recites the additional element, “wherein the express delivery station is used as a virtual warehouse location in a main warehouse where an item is initially ex-warehoused, and the virtual warehouse location is distinct from an entity warehouse location in the main warehouse and is managed by the warehouse management system”. The recited express delivery station is represented as a virtual location in the warehouse management computing environment, which amounts to insignificant extra-solution activity that does not impose any meaningful limits on the abstract idea as in MPEP 2106.05(g).
When considered both individually and as a whole, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
The recitation of additional element is acknowledged as identified above. The discussion with respect to practical application is equally applicable to consideration of whether the claims amount to significantly more. The recited computer elements represent using a computer as a tool to perform the judicial exception as in MPEP 2106.05(f). In addition, the claim recites the additional element, “wherein the express delivery station. The recited express delivery station is represented as a virtual location in the warehouse management computing environment, which amounts to insignificant extra-solution activity that does not impose any meaningful limits on the abstract idea as in MPEP 2106.05(g).
Therefore, there are no meaningful recitations, considered in combination, that transform the judicial exception into a patent eligible application such that the claim amounts to significantly more than the judicial exception itself.
Accordingly, claim 22 is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., abstract idea) without significantly more.
Claims 30 and 38 recite similar limitations as set forth in claim 22, and therefore are rejected based on similar rationale.
Dependent claims 23-29 and 31-37 recite limitations directed to the abstract idea, and do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application nor amount to significantly more.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/07/2026 with respect to the rejection of claims 1-21 under 35 U.S.C. §101 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to Applicant’s arguments, Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Examiner notes that some of Applicant’s arguments are directed to newly added claims, and have been addressed in the updated rejection.
As discussed under section 101 above, the claimed invention(s) is/are directed to a judicial exception (i.e., abstract idea) without significantly more.
The claimed invention describes an order fulfillment and delivery management process. The claim describes the steps of receiving an order cancellation input from a user at a user terminal and transmitting the order cancellation input to an electronic device. The electronic device receives and transmitting the order cancellation notification to a plurality of express delivery stations. The item is intercepted at the express delivery station and ex-warehoused at the express delivery station. An order request is received from the user and linked to the ex-warehoused item based on correlated transported route. The recited steps describe the process of managing an order fulfillment and delivery process, which encompasses “commercial or legal interactions - sales activities or behavior/business relations" that it falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas.
The recited interactions between the recited hardware devices and multiple entities amounts to steps of transmitting, receiving, processing (determining and correlating) and storing information to manage an order fulfillment and deliver process. In particular, the recited hardware devices (electronic device, user terminal) implement the limitations encompassing the abstract idea identified above. The recited computer elements represent using a computer as a tool to perform the judicial exception as in MPEP 2106.05(f).
The recited “express deliver station” is described as a “virtual warehouse location” distinct from a main warehouse. Applicant’s specification describes that “…[t]he WMS receives the virtual warehouse location in-warehouse information which is sent by the express delivery station and indicates that the item is in-warehoused to the virtual warehouse location corresponding to the express delivery station, and records the virtual warehouse location in-warehouse information in warehouse storage record information corresponding to the virtual warehouse location.” (See Application Publication, Paragraph 0023, 0035)
The recited “express delivery station” is represented as a “virtual warehouse location” within the warehouse management computing environment/method. Thus, the “virtual warehouse location” is a virtual representation of the “express delivery station” within the warehouse management computing environment, in contrast to a physical express delivery station. Accordingly, the features of “intercepting”, “ex-warehousing” and “in-warehousing” are actions performed by a virtual representation (express delivery station) within a computing environment.
Thus, the steps of the “intercepting”, “ex-warehousing” and “in-warehousing”, which amounts to insignificant extra-solution activities (processing, storing and retrieving data) that does not impose any meaningful limits on the abstract idea as in MPEP 2106.05(g). In addition, the courts have recognized, “transmitting or receiving data (information) over a network” and “storing and retrieving data in memory”, to be computer functions that are well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions. See MPEP 2106.05(d).
When considered both individually and as a whole, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application nor amount to significantly more than the judicial exception itself.
Accordingly, the claimed invention(s) is/are directed to a judicial exception (i.e., abstract idea) without significantly more.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OLUSEGUN GOYEA whose telephone number is (571)270-5402. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9am-5pm EST.
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, FAHD OBEID can be reached at 5712703324. 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.
/OLUSEGUN GOYEA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627
Prosecution Insights