Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3-4, 13, 16-20, 22, 25-26 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fjeldheim (US 11,465,844).
Regarding claim 1, Fjeldheim discloses a remotely operated vehicle (3) for handling a storage container or a further vehicle, said remotely operated vehicle working on a rail system (100) of an automated storage and retrieval system (1), said rail system overlying upright members and comprising a first set of parallel rails and a second set of parallel rails arranged perpendicular to the first set of parallel rails (Fig.1), said remotely operated vehicle comprising a first set of wheels (18) being arranged to engage with two adjacent rails of the first set of rails and a second set of wheels being arranged to engage with two adjacent rails of the second set of rails (Fig.5), said remotely operated vehicle further comprising a mass balancing system comprising a balance weight (6), said mass balancing system being configured to purposely displace the balance weight in order to improve stability of the remotely operated vehicle (Col.12, line 66 – Col.13, line 26), wherein the balance weight is displaced in response to a change in position of the remotely operated vehicle's center of gravity (COG) (Col.13, lines 24-26), wherein,
the balance weight is displaceable in a vertical direction (Figs.6a, 7), and
the balance weight is displaceable by means of a hoisting device (Figs.6a, 7).
Regarding claim 3, Fjeldheim further discloses the displacement of the balance weight adjusts the remotely operated vehicle's center of gravity (COG) so as to improve stability of the remotely operated vehicle (Col.12, line 66 – Col.13, line 26).
Regarding claim 4, Fjeldheim further discloses the balance weight is displaceable in a horizontal direction (Fig.7).
Regarding claim 13, Fjeldheim further discloses the balance weight is at least one functional part of the remotely operated vehicle such that said balance weight has an additional function in the remotely operated vehicle (Abstract).
Regarding claim 16, Fjeldheim further discloses the balance weight displaces linearly (Fig.7).
Regarding claim 17, Fjeldheim further discloses the remotely operated vehicle is of cantilever type (Col.2, lines 27-30).
Regarding claim 18, Fjeldheim further discloses the remotely operated vehicle is of internal cavity type (Col.2, lines 23-25).
Regarding claim 19, Fjeldheim further discloses the remotely operated vehicle comprises an upper section where the mass balancing system is located (Fig.7).
Regarding claim 20, Fjeldheim further discloses the mass balancing system comprises at least one balance weight guide associated with each balance weight (Fig.5).
Regarding claim 22, Fjeldheim further discloses the remotely operated vehicle (30) comprises a support surface displaceable in a horizontal direction (along grid).
Regarding claim 25, Fjeldheim further discloses said vehicle always moves along a straight path (along grid, Fig.1).
Regarding claim 26, Fjeldheim discloses a method for operating a remotely operated vehicle (3) having a mass balancing system comprising a balance weight (6), said remotely operated vehicle for handling a storage container on a two-dimensional rail system (100) of an automated storage and retrieval system (1), said rail system overlying upright members and comprising a first set of parallel rails and a second set of parallel rails arranged perpendicular to the first set of parallel rails (Fig.1), said remotely operated vehicle comprising a first set of wheels being arranged to engage with two adjacent rails of the first set of rails and a second set of wheels being arranged to engage with two adjacent rails of the second set of rails (Fig.5), the method comprising: purposely displacing the balance weight in response to a change of the remotely operated vehicle's center of gravity (COG) in order to improve stability of the remotely operated vehicle (Col.12, line 66 – Col.13, line 26) , wherein,
the balance weight is displaceable in a vertical direction (Figs.6a, 7), and
the balance weight is displaceable by means of a hoisting device (Figs.6a, 7).
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 of this title, 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 7-12, 23 and 28-30 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fjeldheim (US 11,465,844) in view of Uetake (EP 3040237, see also US 9,873,365).
Regarding claim 7, Fjeldheim does not further specifically disclose the mass balancing system further comprises a sensor for measuring weight of a storage container engaged by the remotely operated vehicle.
Uetake teaches a transport machine wherein a weight sensor detects a weight of the vessel 7. The weight sensor 63 can detect the weight of the vessel 7 and a weight of a load loaded onto the vessel 7 (Para.86).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified Fjeldheim in view of Uetake to include a sensor for measuring weight of a storage container in order to allow for greater control of the system.
Regarding claim 8, Fjeldheim does not further specifically disclose the mass balancing system further comprises a sensor for determining position of a storage container engaged by the remotely operated vehicle.
Uetake teaches a transport machine wherein a weight sensor detects a weight of the vessel 7. The weight sensor 63 can detect the weight of the vessel 7 and a weight of a load loaded onto the vessel 7 (Para.86).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified Fjeldheim in view of Uetake to include a sensor for measuring weight of a storage container in order to allow for greater control of the system.
Regarding claim 9, Fjeldheim does not further specifically disclose the mass balancing system further comprises a sensor for determining spatial distribution of a load weight in the interior of a storage container engaged by the remotely operated vehicle.
Uetake teaches a transport machine wherein a range sensor 61 includes a scanning electro-optical distance measuring instrument capable of outputting physical shape data of a space. The range sensor 61 includes at least one of a laser scanner and a three-dimensional distance sensor, and is capable of obtaining three-dimensional spatial data (Para.82).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified Fjeldheim in view of Uetake to include a sensor for determining spatial distribution of a load weight in the interior of a storage container engaged by the remotely operated vehicle in order to allow for greater control of the system.
Regarding claim 10, Fjeldheim does not further specifically disclose the mass balancing system comprises a sensor that measures an angle of tilt on the remotely operated vehicle.
Uetake teaches a transport machine wherein a weight sensor detects steering sensor 68 outputs a detection value of the steering angle of at least one of the front wheel 8 and the rear wheel 9 onto the processing device 51. (Para.92).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified Fjeldheim in view of Uetake to include a sensor that measures an angle of tilt on the remotely operated vehicle in order to allow for greater control of the system.
Regarding claim 11, Fjeldheim, as modified above, further teaches disclose the mass balancing system comprises a control system (Uetake 51, Para.90) connected to sensors, the sensor that measures an angle of tilt and a balance weight displacing device, wherein the control system, based on data obtained from the sensors, calculates a new position for the balance weight, and instructs the balance weight displacing device to displace the balance weight to said new position (Uetake Para.119-120).
Regarding claim 12, Fjeldheim, as modified above, further teaches the displacement cycle of the balance weight is predetermined in order to counter known future changes associated with the remotely operated vehicle (Uetake Para.79, Para.119-120).
Regarding claim 23, Fjeldheim does not further specifically disclose the remotely operated vehicle has an adjustable footprint (Fig.7).
Regarding claim 28, Fjeldheim does not further specifically disclose the mass balancing system of the remotely operated vehicle further comprises a balance weight displacing device, the method further comprising: measuring a weight of a storage container engaged by the remotely operated vehicle based on obtained weight data, calculating a new position for the balance weight with respect to the remotely operated vehicle and instructing the balance weight displacing device to displace the balance weight to said new position.
Uetake teaches a transport machine wherein a weight sensor detects a weight of the vessel 7. The weight sensor 63 can detect the weight of the vessel 7 and a weight of a load loaded onto the vessel 7 (Para.86) and displacing the balance weight to a new position (Para.119-120).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified Fjeldheim in view of Uetake to include a balance weight displacing device, the method further comprising: measuring a weight of a storage container engaged by the remotely operated vehicle based on obtained weight data, calculating a new position for the balance weight with respect to the remotely operated vehicle and instructing the balance weight displacing device to displace the balance weight to said new position to allow for greater control of the system.
Regarding claim 29, Fjeldheim does not further specifically disclose determining a position of a storage container engaged by the remotely operated vehicle based on obtained position data, calculating a new position for the balance weight with respect to the remotely operated vehicle and instructing the balance weight displacing device to displace the balance weight to said new position.
Uetake teaches a transport machine wherein a weight sensor detects a weight of the vessel 7. The weight sensor 63 can detect the weight of the vessel 7 and a weight of a load loaded onto the vessel 7 (Para.86) and displacing the balance weight to a new position (Para.119-120).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified Fjeldheim in view of Uetake to include determining a position of a storage container engaged by the remotely operated vehicle based on obtained position data, calculating a new position for the balance weight with respect to the remotely operated vehicle and instructing the balance weight displacing device to displace the balance weight to said new position in order to allow for greater control of the system.
Regarding claim 30, Fjeldheim does not further specifically disclose determining a spatial distribution of a load weight in the interior of a storage container engaged by the remotely operated vehicle based on obtained spatial distribution data, calculating a new position for the balance weight with respect to the remotely operated vehicle and instructing the balance weight displacing device to displace the balance weight to said new position.
Uetake teaches a transport machine wherein a range sensor 61 includes a scanning electro-optical distance measuring instrument capable of outputting physical shape data of a space. The range sensor 61 includes at least one of a laser scanner and a three-dimensional distance sensor, and is capable of obtaining three-dimensional spatial data (Para.82) and displacing the balance weight to a new position (Para.119-120).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified Fjeldheim in view of Uetake to include determining a spatial distribution of a load weight in the interior of a storage container engaged by the remotely operated vehicle based on obtained spatial distribution data, calculating a new position for the balance weight with respect to the remotely operated vehicle and instructing the balance weight displacing device to displace the balance weight to said new position in order to allow for greater control of the system.
Claims 14-15 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fjeldheim (US 11,465,844) in view of Havel et al (US Pub App 2023/0077808).
Regarding claim 14, Fjeldheim does not further specifically disclose the balance weight of the remotely operated vehicle is a battery for storing energy.
Havel teaches a load handling device wherein to balance the weight of the battery 142 in the load handling device and thus, improve the stability of the load handling device, the use of a tray 154 to mount the battery 142 allows the weight of other auxiliary or hardware components to counter balance the battery in the load handling device. In the particular embodiment of the present invention, the battery 142 and the lifting drive assembly 140 are mounted adjacent each other and at opposing ends of the tray 154 such that the weight of the battery 142 counteracts (counterbalances) the weight of the lifting drive assembly 140 (Para.57).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified Fjeldheim in view of Havel for the balance weight of the remotely operated vehicle is a battery for storing energy in order to balance the weight of the battery/additional components.
Regarding claim 15, Fjeldheim further discloses the balance weight of the remotely operated vehicle is a motor for propelling the remotely operated vehicle.
Havel teaches a load handling device wherein motor of the lifting drive assembly counterbalances the weight of the rechargeable power source (Para.26).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified Fjeldheim in view of Havel for the balance weight of the remotely operated vehicle is a motor for propelling the remotely operated vehicle in order to balance the weight of the motor/additional components.
Claims 21 and 24 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fjeldheim (US 11,465,844) in view of Austreim (US Pub App 2021/0179351).
Regarding claim 21, Fjeldheim does not further specifically disclose the balance weight reciprocates along a threaded bar.
Austreim teaches a support vehicle for performing operations wherein portions may be connected utilizing a threaded bolt (Para.53).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified Fjeldheim in view of Austreim to allow for the balance weight reciprocates along a threaded bar since doing so would create a controlled linear movement for the purpose of maintaining alignment.
Regarding claim 24, Fjeldheim does not further specifically disclose the remotely operated vehicle is a service vehicle for moving the further vehicle when said further vehicle is out of order.
Austreim teaches a support vehicle for performing operations wherein the vehicle is a service vehicle (Para.135-137 and Abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified Fjeldheim in view of Austreim to allow for the remotely operated vehicle to be a service vehicle for moving the further vehicle when said further vehicle is out of order in order to expediate repair operations.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 9/12/2025, with respect to the claim objections and 112 rejections, together with the amendment filed 9/12/2025, have been fully considered and are persuasive. The claim objections and 112 rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments filed 9/12/2025 with respect to the 102 and 103 rejections of the claims have been fully considered and are not persuasive.
Regarding Applicant's argument contending that the previously made rejection does not disclose a hoisting device, inasmuch as Applicant had claimed this feature, it is disclosed by Fjeldheim. And as such, any arguments pertaining to this element are considered nonpersuasive. As can be seen in at least Fig.6b, Fjeldheim discloses a hoisting device (hoist is defined as to lift or raise) that lifts containers in a vertical direction in order to balance weight (Col.12, line 31 – Col.13, line 26).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ASHLEY K ROMANO whose telephone number is (571)272-9318. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday.
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, Saul Rodriguez can be reached on 571-272-7097. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SAUL RODRIGUEZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3652
/ASHLEY K ROMANO/Examiner, Art Unit 3652
Prosecution Insights