The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-4, 7, 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamashita (US 2012/0328397) in view of Murata (JP 2016-169083), both previously cited.
Yamashita shows an article storage facility comprising:
a first multilevel rack 12L1 (or 12R1) comprising first shelves 22 on a plurality of levels, with the first shelves on the respective levels disposed along a first direction A-B across a horizontal plane;
a second multilevel rack 12L2 (or 12R2) comprising second shelves 22 on a plurality of levels, with the second shelves on the respective levels disposed along the first direction and closer to one side of the article storage facility than the first multilevel rack with respect to the first direction;
a standby station 24 disposed between the first multilevel rack and the second multilevel rack in the first direction and comprising standby conveyors 26 on a number of levels that is at least equal to whichever of the first shelves and the second shelves has a lower number of levels;
a plurality of transfer shuttles 14 disposed for respective levels of the standby conveyors or disposed for the standby conveyors on a plurality of levels, and configured to travel along the first direction and to transfer articles between the standby conveyors and the first shelves and the second shelves; and
a raising and lowering apparatus 16 comprising a raising and lowering conveyor 30, disposed between the first multilevel rack and the right side 24L2/24R2 of the standby station in the first direction and between the second multilevel rack and the left side 24L1/24L2 of the standby station in the first direction, and configured to transfer the articles to and from the standby conveyors, and a raising and lowering mechanism (not explicitly identified but clearly a mechanism moves the conveyor vertically along mast 28; see par [0042]) configured to raise and lower the first raising and lowering conveyor between every level of the standby conveyors (par. [0044]).
Yamashita does not show the raising and lowering apparatus to comprise a first raising and lowering apparatus comprising a first raising and lowering conveyor, disposed between the first multilevel rack and the standby station in the first direction and configured to transfer the articles to and from the standby conveyors, and a first raising and lowering mechanism configured to raise and lower the first raising and lowering conveyor between every level of the standby conveyors; and
a second raising and lowering apparatus comprising a second raising and lowering conveyor, disposed between the second multilevel rack and the standby station in the first direction and configured to transfer the articles to and from the standby conveyors, and a second raising and lowering mechanism configured to raise and lower the second raising and lowering conveyor between every level of the standby conveyors.
Murata shows an article storage facility wherein a first raising and lowering apparatus 23 comprises a first raising and lowering conveyor 47, which is disposed between a first multilevel rack 7 and a standby station 25 in a first direction (denoted by large double-ended arrows in Fig. 1) and is configured to transfer articles W to and from the standby conveyors, and a first raising and lowering mechanism 49 configured to raise and lower the first raising and lowering conveyor between every level of the standby conveyors, and wherein a second raising and lowering apparatus 21 comprises a second raising and lowering conveyor 37, which is disposed between a second multilevel rack 5 and the standby station in the first direction and is configured to transfer the articles to and from the standby conveyors, and a second raising and lowering mechanism 39 configured to raise and lower the second raising and lowering conveyor between every level of the standby conveyors. This allows more articles to be efficiently moved into and out of storage simultaneously (see pars. [0004] – [0008]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the apparatus of Yamashita by configuring the raising and lowering apparatus to comprise a first raising and lowering apparatus comprising a first raising and lowering conveyor, disposed between the first multilevel rack and the standby station in the first direction and configured to transfer the articles to and from the standby conveyors, and a first raising and lowering mechanism configured to raise and lower the first raising and lowering conveyor between every level of the standby conveyors, and a second raising and lowering apparatus comprising a second raising and lowering conveyor, disposed between the second multilevel rack and the standby station in the first direction and configured to transfer the articles to and from the standby conveyors, and a second raising and lowering mechanism configured to raise and lower the second raising and lowering conveyor between every level of the standby conveyors, as shown by Murata, to more efficiently move articles into and out of storage simultaneously.
Re claim 2, Yamashita shows a loading conveyor 18 configured to convey the articles to be loaded into the first multilevel rack or the second multilevel rack, and an unloading conveyor 20 configured to convey the articles to be unloaded from the first multilevel rack or the second multilevel rack, wherein the raising and lowering mechanism is further configured to move the raising and lowering conveyor to a position where the raising and lowering conveyor is further configured to receive the articles from the loading conveyor, and wherein the raising and lowering mechanism is further configured to move the raising and lowering conveyor to a position where the articles are capable of being passed from the raising and lowering conveyor to the unloading conveyor.
When modified as above, the first raising and lowering mechanism would obviously move the first raising and lowering conveyor to a position where the first raising and lowering conveyor receives the articles from the loading conveyor, and the second raising and lowering mechanism would obviously move the second raising and lowering conveyor to a position where the articles are passed from the second raising and lowering conveyor to the unloading conveyor.
Re claim 3, Yamashita shows that the loading conveyor is disposed at a position that coincides with the first multilevel rack as viewed from above or below along an up-down direction, and wherein the unloading conveyor is disposed at a position that coincides with the second multilevel rack as viewed from above or below along the up-down direction (Figs. 1, 4).
Re claim 4, Yamashita shows that the raising and lowering conveyor can be used to receive articles from the loading conveyor and pass them directly to the unloading conveyor without passing the standby conveyors. When modified as above, a “discharging conveyor” (as broadly recited) configured to discharge the articles, which have been received by the first raising and lowering conveyor from the loading conveyor, without passing the standby conveyors, would obviously be positioned between the first and second raising and lowering conveyors to accomplish the same function, especially since the discharging conveyor is only nominally distinct from the standby conveyors (i.e., nothing structurally distinguishes such a discharging conveyor from the standby conveyors so as to preclude the discharging conveyor from simply being one of the standby conveyors).
Re claim 7, Yamashita as modified shows that each standby conveyor of the standby station includes loading regions where the articles are capable of loaded in a row along the first direction and each standby conveyor is further configured to move the loaded articles along the first direction (i.e., as suggested by Fig. 1 of Murata), and wherein at least one loading region of the loading regions is capable of being used as a position where each transfer shuttle is further configured transfer the articles to the standby conveyor, and at least one other loading region of the loading regions is capable of being used as a position where each transfer shuttle is further configured to receive the articles from the standby conveyor.
Re claim 10, Yamashita as modified shows that a direction perpendicular to the first direction as viewed from above or below along an up-down direction is a second direction R-L, and wherein the first multilevel rack, the second multilevel rack, the standby station, the first raising and lowering apparatus, and the second raising and lowering apparatus are all disposed in pairs that face each other in the second direction with travel paths of the transfer shuttles in between (i.e., the combined features of Fig. 3 of Yamashita and Fig. 2 of Murata).
Re claim 11, in the Figs. 1-7 embodiments, Yamashita shows equal numbers of the standby conveyors, the first shelves, and the second shelves.
Claims 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamashita in view of Murata, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Jacobs (US 2021/0261332, previously cited).
As indicated in the previous Office action, the features of the Jacobs reference relied upon to support the following rejection are disclosed in the related provisional application 62/981,229 filed 2/25/20, and as such that is deemed to be the effective fling date of the reference, at least insofar as any features thereof are relied upon herein.
Re claim 6, in Yamashita as modified, the first raising and lowering mechanism would obviously comprise a first mast 28 (analogous to first mast 41 of Murata) configured to guide the first raising and lowering conveyor in an up-down direction, and the second raising and lowering mechanism would obviously comprise a second mast 28 (analogous to second mast 31 of Murata) configured to guide the second raising and lowering conveyor in the up-down direction, but Yamashita as modified does not show that the first mast and the second mast would be disposed at positions that do not coincide with travel paths of the transfer shuttles as viewed from above or below along the up-down direction.
Jacobs shows a similar article storage facility wherein a first raising and lowering mechanism 12L is disposed between a first multilevel rack 14L and a standby station 14C, and a second raising and lowering mechanism 12R is disposed between the standby station and a second multilevel rack 14R, and wherein each of a plurality of transfer shuttles 26 is configured to travel along an uninterrupted path extending along a shelf of the first rack, a conveyor of the standby station, and a shelf of the second rack (par. [0031]). Although Jacobs does not explicitly disclose that the first and second raising and lowering mechanisms comprise respective first and second masts disposed at positions that do not coincide with travel paths of the transfer shuttles as viewed from above or below along the up-down direction, it is apparent from the side views of Figs. 5, 6, 11, 13 and 14, and the top views of Figs. 7-10 and 15, that each raising and lowering mechanism includes a vertically extending, mast-like structure disposed at a position that does not coincide with the travel paths of the transfer shuttles.
Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have further modified the apparatus of Yamashita by positioning the first mast and the second mast at positions that did not coincide with travel paths of the transfer shuttles as viewed from above or below along the up-down direction, as taught by Jacobs, so that individual transfer shuttles could move along a travel path extending along the first shelves, the standby conveyor, and the second shelves.
Re claim 5, Yamashita as modified shows that a side in the first direction where the first shelves are disposed relative to the second shelves is a first direction-first side, and a side where the second shelves are disposed relative to the first shelves is a first direction-second side, but does not show that each transfer shuttle is configured to run in the first direction between an end portion at the first direction-first side of the first shelves to an end portion at the first direction-second side of the second shelves and further configured to transfer the articles between the first shelves, the standby conveyors, and the second shelves.
However, as noted above with respect to claim 6, Jacobs shows that each of a plurality of transfer shuttles is configured to travel along an uninterrupted path extending along a shelf of the first rack, a conveyor of the standby station, and a shelf of the second rack. Thus, when modified above, each shuttle of Yamashita would obviously be configured to run in the first direction between an end portion at the first direction-first side of the first shelves to an end portion at the first direction-second side of the second shelves and further configured to transfer the articles between the first shelves, the standby conveyor, and the second shelves.
Claims 8-9 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Applicant's arguments filed 10/10/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that a single transfer shuttle of Yamashita cannot transfer articles between the first shelf and the second shelf and thus allegedly does not teach or suggest “a plurality of transfer shuttles … configured … to transfer articles between the standby conveyors and the first shelves and the second shelves”, as set forth in claim 1. This is not persuasive. As acknowledged by applicant, Yamashita shows some of the transfer shuttles can transfer articles between the first shelves and the transfer conveyors on one side of the standby station while other transfer shuttles can transfer articles between the second shelves and the transfer conveyors on the other side of the standby station. However, the claim 1 limitation noted above does not require any particular individual shuttle to be able to transfer articles between the transfer conveyors and the first shelves and between the transfer conveyors and the second shelves, but rather merely requires “a plurality of transfer shuttles … configured … to transfer articles between the standby conveyors and the first shelves and the second shelves”. The transfer shuttles of Yamashita collectively are configured to do so. Furthermore, as indicated in the previous Office action with respect to claim 5 as previously presented, even if the claim(s) was/were amended to recite that each shuttle could transfer articles between the standby conveyors and the first and second shelves, it would be subject to the rejection utilizing the tertiary Jacobs reference, as applied to amended claim 5 above. In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground of rejection (i.e., claim 5) presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 James Keenan whose telephone number is (571)272-6925. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Thurs.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Saul Rodriguez can be reached at 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 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.
/James Keenan/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3652
12/11/25