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 .
Claims 1, 3-6, and 8-22 have been examined.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 December 3, 2025 has been entered.
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.
The following 35 U.S.C. 101 analysis is performed in accordance with section 2106 of the Manual of Patent Examination Procedure (concerning Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance).
First, it is determined that the claims are directed to a statutory category of invention. See MPEP 2106.03 (II). In the instant case, independent claims 1 and 16 recite systems comprising actual apparatus, and therefore fall within the statutory category of machine, as do their dependents; independent claim 10 recites a method, and therefore falls within the statutory category of process. Therefore, claims 1, 3-6, and 8-22 are directed to statutory subject matter under Step 1 of the Alice/Mayo test (Step 1: YES).
The claims are then analyzed to determine whether the claims are directed to a judicial exception. See MPEP 2106.04. The claims are analyzed to evaluate whether they recite a judicial exception (Step 2A, Prong One) as well as analyzed to evaluate whether the claims recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application of the judicial exception (Step 2A, Prong Two). See MPEP 2106.04. Under Step 2A, Prong One, instant claims 1, 3-6, and 8-22 are directed to systems and a method for picking up orders, and therefore to commercial interactions, a form of abstract idea in the category of certain methods of organizing human activity; an abstract idea is a judicial exception. (Step 2A, Prong One: YES)
Proceeding to Step 2A, Prong Two, the independent claims 1, 10, and 16 are largely parallel to each other; they do not recite any of the specific limitations that are indicative of integration of into a practical application, and do not otherwise apply or use the judicial exception in a meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment; the claims as a whole are not more than a drafting effort to monopolize the exception. The technical features of the claims are described at a high level of generality, with, for example, an “order delivery management unit configured to order collection of the ordered items”, and a “first 2-dimensional bar code visible from said first parking space comprising information identifying said order picking station and/or a first signalling element for signalling a request for delivery of an order located in an immediate vicinity of said first parking space and/or a detector for detecting presence of a customer who has placed an order in the vicinity of said first parking space” listed as alternatives for conveying the information that a particular customer ais at a first parking space. Likewise, the “automated buffer storage facility” and “automated router which routes said stored items from said buffer storage facility to said picking stations” are recited at ahigh level of generality. The various dependent claims depending from claims 1, 10, and 16 also do not recite any of the specific limitations that are indicative of integration of into a practical application, and do not otherwise apply or use the judicial exception in a meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment. (Claims 1, 3-6, 8-22: Step 2A, Prong Two: NO)
Next, under Step 2B of the Alice/Mayo test, the claims are analyzed to determine whether there are additional claim limitations that individually, or as an ordered combination, ensure that the claim amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea. See MPEP 2106.05. The instant claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea for at least the following reasons. Claims 1, 3-6, and 8-22 do not recite any of the specific limitations that are indicative of integration of into a practical application, and do not otherwise apply or use the judicial exception in a meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment; the claims as a whole are not more than a drafting effort to monopolize the exception. Furthermore, only well-understood, routine, and conventional technology is involved in implementing the claimed invention. Beginning with claim 10, which is broader than the other two independent claims, having a pick-up point involving a plurality of order picking stations, each associated with an access and parking lane, is a description of a place, not, in a strong sense, of technology. Choi et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2014/0132389) discloses (paragraph 18, emphasis added), “The barcode scanner may be any conventional device configured with the scanning engine to capture data encoded in a 1-dimensional or 2-dimensional barcode.” Hence, the 2-dimensional bar codes and the scanning thereof by a customer need involve only well-understood, routine, and conventional technology. Willner et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2019/0097650) discloses (paragraph 86, emphasis added), “Optionally, the data processor is included in a portable wireless communication device, and the program instructions are provided to the device via one or more downloadable software applications, conventionally known as ‘Apps’.” Hence, the “dedicated application downloadable on a terminal of said customer” need involve only well-understood, routine, and conventional technology. The limitations of claim 10, whether considered separately or in combination with each other, do not raise the claimed method to significantly more than an abstract idea.
Claim 11, which depends from claim 10, recites “wherein said first signalling element and/or said second signalling element comprises a terminal.” Barnes et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2019/0205468) discloses (paragraph 26, emphasis added), “Detailed descriptions of well-known networks, communication systems, computers, terminals, devices, components, techniques, data and network protocols, formats, software products and systems, enterprise applications, operating systems, enterprise technologies, middleware, interfaces, and hardware are omitted so as not to obscure the description of the various embodiments.” Hence, for one or more signalling elements to comprise a terminal need involve only well-understood, routine, and conventional technology. Therefore, the limitation of claim 11, whether considered separately or in combination with the limitations of claim 10, does not raise the claimed method to significantly more than an abstract idea.
Claim 12, which depends from claim 10, recites “wherein said first signalling element and/or said second signalling element comprises at least one signalling element belonging to the group consisting of: bar code reader; QR code reader; magnetic strip or chip reader; numerical keyboard for entering a code; biometric identification reader.” Behm et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2017/0018148) discloses (paragraph 37, emphasis added), “The scanner 40 may be any conventional barcode reader, such as a point scanner, linear scanner, laser scanner, LED image scanner, and so forth.” Hence, having at least one signalling element belonging to the recited group, and specifically being a bar code reader, need involve only well-understood, routine, and conventional technology. Therefore, the limitation of claim 12, whether considered separately or in combination with the limitations of claim 10, does not raise the claimed method to significantly more than an abstract idea.
Claim 13, which depends from claim 10, recites “wherein said pick-up point comprises, for each access and parking lane, a signalling element which signals a number of vehicles parked in said access and parking lane.” Claim 14, which depends from claim 13, recites, “The method according to claim 13, characterised in that said signalling element which signals the number of vehicles parked in an access and parking lane comprises a traffic light.” Amacker (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2017/0250989) discloses (paragraph 15, emphasis added), “Conventional traffic control devices, such as traffic lights, are used to control traffic flow.” A traffic light is inherently a signalling element. Hence, having a signalling element which signals a number of vehicles, and specifically a traffic light, requires only well-understood, routine, and conventional technology. Therefore, the limitations of claim 12 and 13, whether considered separately or in combination with each other and with the limitations of claim 10, do not raise the claimed method to significantly more than an abstract idea.
Claim 15, which depends from claim 10, recites “said stored items being delivered in bins to said picking stations, at least one of said picking stations comprises a transfer element which transfers empty bins to said automated router.” As the “transfer element” is recited at high level of abstractions, and is not specifically technological, the limitation of claim 15, whether considered separately or in combination with the limitations of claim 10, does not raise the claimed method to significantly more than an abstract idea. (Claims 10-15, Step 2B: NO)
Turning now to claim 1, claim 1 is a system claim largely parallel to method claim 10, but with the additional limitations:
wherein said first signalling element and/or said second signalling element comprises a terminal;
wherein said pick-up point comprises, for each access and parking lane, a signalling element which signals a number of vehicles parked in said access and parking lane.
Barnes et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2019/0205468) discloses (paragraph 26, emphasis added), “Detailed descriptions of well-known networks, communication systems, computers, terminals, devices, components, techniques, data and network protocols, formats, software products and systems, enterprise applications, operating systems, enterprise technologies, middleware, interfaces, and hardware are omitted so as not to obscure the description of the various embodiments.” Hence, for one or more signalling elements to comprise a terminal requires only well-understood, routine, and conventional technology. Amacker (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2017/0250989) discloses (paragraph 15, emphasis added), “Conventional traffic control devices, such as traffic lights, are used to control traffic flow.” A traffic light is inherently a signalling element. Hence, having a signalling element which signals a number of vehicles. Hence, having a signalling element which signals a number of vehicles parked in said access and parking lane requires only well-understood, routine, and conventional technology. Therefore, these limitations, whether considered separately or in combination with each other and with the other limitations of claim 1, do not raise the claimed system to significantly more than an abstract idea.
Claim 3, which depends from claim 1, recites “wherein said first signalling element and said signalling element are spaced from 5 to 10 metres apart.” This spacing is not significantly technological. Therefore, the limitation of claim 3, whether considered separately or in combination with the limitations of claim 1, does not raise the claimed system to significantly more than an abstract idea.
Claim 4, which depends from claim 1, recites “wherein said access and parking lanes are arranged in a herringbone pattern and form an angle of 30 to 50 degrees with a service road of said pick-up point.” The arrangement of the access and parking lanes is not significantly technological. Therefore, the limitation of claim 4, whether considered separately or in combination with the limitations of claim 1, does not raise the claimed system to significantly more than an abstract idea.
Claim 5, which depends from claim 1, recites “wherein said first signalling element and/or said second signalling element comprises at least one signalling element belonging to the group consisting of: bar code reader; QR code reader; magnetic strip or chip reader; numerical keyboard for entering a code; biometric identification reader.” Behm et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2017/0018148) discloses (paragraph 37, emphasis added), “The scanner 40 may be any conventional barcode reader, such as a point scanner, linear scanner, laser scanner, LED image scanner, and so forth.” Hence, having at least one signalling element belonging to the recited group, and specifically being a bar code reader, need involve only well-understood, routine, and conventional technology. Therefore, the limitation of claim 5, whether considered separately or in combination with the limitations of claim 1, does not raise the claimed system to significantly more than an abstract idea.
Claim 6, which depends from claim 1, recites “wherein said detector for detecting the presence of a customer having placed an order in the vicinity of said first parking space and/or said detector for detecting the presence of a customer having placed an order in the vicinity of said second parking space comprises at least one detection element belonging to the group consisting of: presence sensor; geolocation system; license plate recognition device.” Wagner et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2013/0104035) discloses (paragraph 5, emphasis added), “One well-known example of geolocation information is the Global Positioning System (GPS). Terrestrial devices receive transmissions from orbiting satellites of the GPS system and use information contained in the transmissions to determine their position.” Hence, having one or both detectors be at least a geolocation system need involve only well-understood, routine, and conventional technology. Therefore, the limitation of claim 6, whether considered separately or in combination with the limitations of claim 1, does not raise the claimed system to significantly more than an abstract idea.
Claim 8, which depends from claim 1, recites, “The system according to claim 1, characterised in that said signalling element which signals the number of vehicles parked in an access and parking lane comprises a traffic light.” Amacker (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2017/0250989) discloses (paragraph 15, emphasis added), “Conventional traffic control devices, such as traffic lights, are used to control traffic flow.” Hence, having the signalling element which signals a number of vehicles comprise a traffic light requires only well-understood, routine, and conventional technology. Therefore, the limitation of claim 8, whether considered separately or in combination with the limitations of claim 1, does not raise the claimed system to significantly more than an abstract idea.
Claim 9, which depends from claim 1, recites, “The system according to claim 1, wherein, said stored items being delivered in bins to said picking stations, at least one of said picking stations comprises a transfer element which transfers empty bins to said automated router.” As the “transfer element” is recited at high level of abstractions, and is not specifically technological, the limitation of claim 9, whether considered separately or in combination with the limitations of claim 1, does not raise the claimed system to significantly more than an abstract idea. (Claims 1, 3-6, 8, and 9, Step 2B: NO)
Turning now to claim 16, claim 16 is a system claim largely parallel to method claim 10, but with the additional limitations:
wherein said first signalling element and/or said second signalling element comprises at least one signalling element belonging to the group consisting of:
bar code reader;
QR code reader;
magnetic strip or chip reader;
numerical keyboard for entering a code;
biometric identification reader,
wherein said pick-up point comprises, for each access and parking lane, a signalling element which signals a number of vehicles parked in said access and parking lane.
Behm et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2017/0018148) discloses (paragraph 37, emphasis added), “The scanner 40 may be any conventional barcode reader, such as a point scanner, linear scanner, laser scanner, LED image scanner, and so forth.” Hence, having at least one signalling element belonging to the recited group, and specifically being a bar code reader, need involve only well-understood, routine, and conventional technology. Amacker (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2017/0250989) discloses (paragraph 15, emphasis added), “Conventional traffic control devices, such as traffic lights, are used to control traffic flow.” Traffic lights are inherently signaling elements. Hence, having the pick-up point comprise a signalling element which signals a number of vehicles requires only well-understood, routine, and conventional technology. Therefore, these limitations, whether considered separately or in combination with each other and with the other limitations of claim 16, do not raise the claimed system to significantly more than an abstract idea.
Claim 17, which depends from claim 16, recites “wherein said first signalling element and/or said second signalling element comprises a terminal.” Barnes et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2019/0205468) discloses (paragraph 26, emphasis added), “Detailed descriptions of well-known networks, communication systems, computers, terminals, devices, components, techniques, data and network protocols, formats, software products and systems, enterprise applications, operating systems, enterprise technologies, middleware, interfaces, and hardware are omitted so as not to obscure the description of the various embodiments.” Hence, for one or more signalling elements to comprise a terminal need involve only well-understood, routine, and conventional technology. Therefore, the limitation of claim 17, whether considered separately or in combination with the limitations of claim 16, does not raise the claimed system to significantly more than an abstract idea.
Claim 18, which depends from claim 16, recites “wherein said first signalling element and said signalling element are spaced from 5 to 10 metres apart.” This spacing is not significantly technological. Therefore, the limitation of claim 18, whether considered separately or in combination with the limitations of claim 16, does not raise the claimed system to significantly more than an abstract idea.
Claim 19, which depends from claim 16, recites “wherein said access and parking lanes are arranged in a herringbone pattern and form an angle of 30 to 50 degrees with a service road of said pick-up point.” The arrangement of the access and parking lanes is not significantly technological. Therefore, the limitation of claim 19, whether considered separately or in combination with the limitations of claim 16, does not raise the claimed system to significantly more than an abstract idea.
Claim 20, which depends from claim 16, recites “wherein said detector for detecting the presence of a customer having placed an order in the vicinity of said first parking space and/or said detector for detecting the presence of a customer having placed an order in the vicinity of said second parking space comprises at least one detection element belonging to the group consisting of: presence sensor; geolocation system; license plate recognition device.” Wagner et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2013/0104035) discloses (paragraph 5, emphasis added), “One well-known example of geolocation information is the Global Positioning System (GPS). Terrestrial devices receive transmissions from orbiting satellites of the GPS system and use information contained in the transmissions to determine their position.” Hence, having one or both detectors be at least a geolocation system need involve only well-understood, routine, and conventional technology. Therefore, the limitation of claim 20, whether considered separately or in combination with the limitations of claim 16, does not raise the claimed system to significantly more than an abstract idea.
Claim 21, which depends from claim 16, recites, “The system according to claim 16, characterised in that said signalling element which signals the number of vehicles parked in an access and parking lane comprises a traffic light.” Amacker (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2017/0250989) discloses (paragraph 15, emphasis added), “Conventional traffic control devices, such as traffic lights, are used to control traffic flow.” Hence, having the signalling element which signals a number of vehicles comprise a traffic light requires only well-understood, routine, and conventional technology. Therefore, the limitation of claim 21, whether considered separately or in combination with the limitations of claim 16, does not raise the claimed system to significantly more than an abstract idea.
Claim 22, which depends from claim 1, recites, “The system according to claim 16, wherein, said stored items being delivered in bins to said picking stations, at least one of said picking stations comprises a transfer element which transfers empty bins to said automated router.” As the “transfer element” is recited at high level of abstractions, and is not specifically technological, the limitation of claim 22, whether considered separately or in combination with the limitations of claim 16, does not raise the claimed system to significantly more than an abstract idea. (Claims 16-22, Step 2B: NO)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vallabh (U.S. Patent 7,054,832) in view of Zelenskiy et al. (U.S. Patent 11,113,841) and Wallat et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2014/0176716). Vallabh discloses a method for delivering orders ordered in-line near a trunk of a vehicle (in that vehicles frequently have trunks), involving a pick-up point having a plurality of order pick-up stations (column 9, lines 23-28, emphasis added), “The vehicle loading area 302 preferably comprises multiple loading stations 318 at which customers can pick up ordered goods. While the FIG. 12 shows three stations 312, it should be noted that any number could be provided as desired. Multiple loading stations are preferred to enable quick transfer of goods to customers.” Vallabh discloses an automated buffer storage facility of ordered items, and an automated router which routes said stored items from said buffer storage facility to said picking stations (column 10, lines 48-60, emphasis added), “After a customer order has been received, an available container 320 is associated with the order and loaded with the ordered goods. (Loading can be performed immediately on receipt of the order or at some later time if the selected pickup time is not immediate.) For convenience, the goods are preferably first loaded in disposable paper or plastic bags that the customer can take home. Once the container 320 has been loaded, it is moved from the main storage area 308 to the intermediate area 310 to await customer pickup. Then upon arrival of the customer to pickup his or her goods, the container 320 is moved (preferably automatically) from the intermediate area 310 using the transfer mechanism 304 to the loading area 302 for pickup.”
Vallabh discloses or makes obvious an order delivery management unit configured to order the collection of the ordered items of an order in said storage facility and to control the activation of the router. See Figure 13, showing a computer system, in particular a “Central Controller 319” connected to the “Transfer System 304”. See also column 11, line 51, through column 12, line 4, beginning, “Once the central controller 319 has identified the customer”. See also column 12, lines 31-36, emphasis added), “The transfer system 304 preferably also includes container locating mechanisms 354 (preferably automated), which identify and load containers onto selected transporters leading to particular loading stations 318. The central controller 319 preferably controls the locating mechanisms 314.”
Vallabh discloses the existence of trunks of vehicles, causing delivery of orders to be delivery of orders ordered near a trunk of a vehicle, at least in many cases. Specifically, Vallabh discloses (column 13, lines 26-33, emphasis added), “As the shopper drives to the designated loading station 318, container(s) with the shopper’s goods are being transferred from the storage area to the loading station. At the loading station, the shopper opens his or her car (e.g., the car trunk) and loads goods from the container 320 if the loading station is a self-serve station. If the station is a full-serve station, personnel will be available to load the groceries in the customer’s vehicle.”
Vallabh does not disclose that the “merchandize pickup system” shown in Figure 12 involves actual parking spaces. However, Zelenskiy et al. (U.S. Patent 11,113,841) teaches parking spaces in the context of a system for picking up orders, e.g., in column 6, lines 1-5, emphasis added, “The vehicle 112 entering the parking area 102 may locate an available parking space (e.g., spaces 106, 122, 124) in the parking lots 104 and proceed to park. The camera 110 may capture an image of the parked vehicle 112 in one of the parking spaces.” Zelenskiy further teaches (column 6, lines 49-63, emphasis added), “Once the computer system 126 has been configured as described above, the system may utilize the camera 110 to detect when a customer has arrived and parked in a parking space (e.g., Parking Space D), and may then transmit this information to a staff person of the pick-up location 108. In some embodiments, the computer system 126 may do further processing of the license plate. For example, the system 126 may do image recognition of the characters on the license plate to determine the identity of the vehicle license plate. With that information, the system 126 may be able to match a particular parking space with a vehicle, and then further match the vehicle to a customer’s order. A staff member may be able to quickly deliver the customer’s order to the correct parking space where the customer’s vehicle is parked.” Further, Zelenskiy teaches (column 5, lines 53-55, emphasis added), “Continuing with the example of FIG. 1, the pick-up location 108 may be designed to receive orders from customers online.” The customer is thus a customer who has placed an order, so the camera and system for image recognition of Zelenskiy qualifies as a detector for detecting presence of a customer who has placed order in the vicinity of said parking space. Hence, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of electronic commerce on the date of inventors’ earliest priority for a pick-up point to comprise, for each order picking station, a detector for detecting presence of a customer who has placed an order in the vicinity of that parking space, for at least the obvious advantage, as per Zelenskiy, of arranging the delivery of the customer’s order to that customer. Likewise, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of electronic commerce on the date of inventors’ earliest priority for the order delivery management unit to be configured so that said management unit generates instructions for controlling the activation of the collection of the items of the order of the customer having been detected in the vicinity of a parking space and instructions for controlling the routing of said items by the router to the picking station associated with the access lane where the presence of the customer has been detected if said items are present within the buffer storage facility, for the obvious advantage of causing the customer’s order to be delivered to that customer.
Neither Vallabh nor Zelenskiy expressly teaches each order picking station having an associated motor vehicle access and parking lane adjacent thereto, and each access lane comprises a first vehicle parking space and a second vehicle parking space, said second space being placed behind said first space in said lane. Figure 16 of Vallabh shows at least one lane. Vallabh discloses (column 11, lines 33-38, emphasis added), “For customer vehicles not equipped with an identification tag 342, a separate lane 380 is preferably provided having an input device 382 (such as a keypad) into which the customer can enter his or her identity. This information is also transmitted to the central control system.” Vallabh discloses (column 12, lines 5-12, emphasis added), “The system notifies the customer of the loading station 318 selected preferably by displaying the loading station number on a display 346 provided in each lane. The display can comprise, for example, an LCD or an LED display. (Alternatively, a single large display (not shown) can be provided for all lanes.) The display 346 can, e.g., provide the following sample message: ‘Mr. Doe, please proceed to Loading Station No. 2 to pickup your groceries.’” It is implied that Mr. Doe would park his vehicle at Loading Station No. 2, making it a parking space. For one vehicle parking space to be behind another is well known, as taught, for example in Wallat et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2014/0176716) (paragraph 30, emphasis added), “In another embodiment, attempting to acquire mirror width information can include instructing a vehicle operator to park the vehicle inside a particular parking space that has an empty parking space in front of it that shares a common straight line with the particular parking space.” Hence, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of electronic commerce on the date of inventors’ earliest priority for each order picking station to have an associated motor vehicle access and parking lane, wherein each access lane comprises a first vehicle parking space and a second vehicle parking space, said second space being placed behind said first space in said lane, for the obvious advantage of readily arranging the delivery of their respective orders to first and second customers parked in first and second vehicle parking spaces placed in a reasonable geometric relation to accommodate multiple vehicles.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vallabh, Zelenskiy, and Wallat as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Kim et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2019/0377360). Kim teaches (paragraph 100, emphasis added), “Meanwhile, the request for the item delivery service, which has been transmitted by the first terminal 420 to the server 410, includes information on the item 440, user information of the first terminal 420, and information on a pickup location and time of the item 440, and the like, which the user of the first terminal 420 intends to deliver to the other user of the second terminal 430. However, the information included in the request for the item delivery service is not limited thereto.” See also paragraph 138. Hence, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of electronic commerce on the date of inventors’ earliest priority for the first signaling element and/or the second signaling element to comprise a terminal, for at least the obvious advantage of using well-known, widely available technology to signal a request for delivery of an order.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vallabh, Zelenskiy, and Wallat as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Ducrou et al. (U.S. Patent 10,482,421). Ducrou is directed to a system for expediting the delivery of items, and discloses, for example (column 4, lines 7-16, emphasis added), “Responding to this, the attendant may gather the items of the staged order and place them on the tote. The attendant may be waiting for the user at a predicted parking space or else arrive shortly thereafter at another parking space of the user’s selection. The attendant may acquire validation data from the user to confirm identity. For example, the attendant may ask the user to state their name. If the name corresponds to the name indicated by the dispatch data, the attendant may begin to load the items from the tote to the user’s vehicle.” Ducrou further discloses (column 17, lines 11-16, emphasis added), “The sensors 118 may include other sensors 118(5) as well. For example, other sensors 118(5) may include pneumatic road tube counters, ultrasonic rangefinders, thermometers, barometric sensors, hygrometers, rain gauges, biometric input devices including, but not limited to, fingerprint or palm scanners, and so forth.” Hence, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of order delivery on the date of inventors’ earliest priority for the first signaling element and/or second signaling element to comprise at least one belonging to the group consisting of: bar code reader, QR code reader, magnetic strip or chip reader, numerical keyboard for entering a code, and biometric identification reader, such as a fingerprint reader, for at least the obvious advantage of being able to confirm (or sometimes disconfirm) the identity of a user seeking to pick an order, if the user giving his supposed name be considered insufficient, and thereby avoid theft of ordered items, or honest errors regarding which user is to obtain which items.
Claim 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vallabh, Zelenskiy, and Wallat as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Bridgman et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2009/0255195). As per claim 13, Vallabh does not disclose that the pick-up point comprises, for each access and parking lane, a signaling element which signals a number of vehicles parked in said access and parking lane. However, Bridgman teaches (paragraph 80, emphasis added), “After an order is at an order station 202, traffic directions are displayed at that signaling device 216 proximate to the order station 202 where the order has been placed, to prompt the vehicle having placed an order to moved [sic] further downstream. Such directions, for example, may be ‘Please proceed to the delivery window to pick up your order.’ This same message may be displayed at all further downstream unoccupied order stations 202 from the order station 202 where the order was placed. For example, if a vehicle 204 finishes placing an order at order station 202c, and order stations 202a and 202b are unoccupied, the message ‘Please proceed to the delivery window to pick up your order’ is displayed at the display of order station 202c, and preferably also 202b and 202a, and/or other traffic signaling devices 216a, 216b and 216c. By displaying such messages, a vehicle having placed an order will be remined to move downstream from in-line order area 200, and nor remain parked in in-line order area 200 for an excessive length of time.” Hence, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of order delivery on the date of inventors’ earliest priority for the pick-up point to comprise, for each access and parking lane, a signaling element which signals a number of vehicles parked in said access and parking lane, for the obvious advantage of sending appropriate messages to the operators of those vehicles, such as, as per Bridgman, causing the vehicles to move out of the way, and go where it is more convenient for them to be.
As per claim 8, Bridgman further teaches (paragraph 79, emphasis added), “Alternatively, or additionally, traffic directions may be displayed on one or more separate traffic control devices 216a-c, which may be any suitable signaling means such as a display screen or other means, such as traffic lights which may be stop and go lights or other suitable signaling devices.” Hence, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of order delivery on the date of inventors’ earliest priority for the signaling element which signals the number of vehicles parked in an access and parking lane to comprise a traffic light, for such obvious advantages as sending signals to the drivers of vehicles by familiar means which are readily visible, including being readily visible at night or in other poor light.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vallabh, Zelenskiy, and Wallat as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Kalm et al. (U.S. Patent 11,281,172). Vallabh discloses stored items being delivered in bins to packing stations (column 10, lines 4-7, emphasis added), “In accordance with one embodiment of the invention, the goods are preferably collected and placed in a reusable container or bin such as, e.g., the container 320 shown in FIG. 15.” Vallabh does not disclose that at least one of the packing stations comprises a transfer element which transfers empty bins to said automated router, but Kalm teaches transferring (“returning”) empty bins for reuse, specifically (column 1, line 65, through column 2, line 7, emphasis added), “The purchased items can be found in a warehouse and placed in an inventory bin. The inventory bin can be fed into the inventory handling apparatus, where it is rotated and the purchaser’s items are deposited onto the output conveyor. In some embodiments, the inventory handling apparatus can include an outer conveyance channel for returning the empty inventory bin for reuse. For example, after the inventory bin has been emptied of items, the outer conveyance channel can move the inventory bin toward a location where the empty inventory bin can be refilled with additional items.” Hence, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of order delivery on the date of inventors’ earliest priority for at least one of the packing stations to comprise a transfer element which transfers empty bins to said automated router, for the obvious advantage of enabling bins to be easily reused, saving the cost of new bins, and the cost of having human laborers transfer the empty bins back by hand.
Non-Obvious Subject Matter
Claims 1, 3-6, 8, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101, but recite non-obvious subject matter.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of non-obvious subject matter: The closest prior art of record, Vallabh (U.S. Patent 7,054,832), discloses a system and corresponding method for delivery of orders ordered in line near a trunk of a vehicle (in that vehicles frequently have trunks), comprising a pick-up point having a plurality of order picking stations (column 9, lines 23-28, emphasis added), “The vehicle loading area 302 preferably comprises multiple loading stations 318 at which customers can pick up ordered goods. While the FIG. 12 shows three stations 312, it should be noted that any number could be provided as desired. Multiple loading stations are preferred to enable quick transfer of goods to customers.” Vallabh discloses an automated buffer storage facility of ordered items, and an automated router which routes said stored items from said buffer storage facility to said picking stations (column 10, lines 48-60, emphasis added), “After a customer order has been received, an available container 320 is associated with the order and loaded with the ordered goods. (Loading can be performed immediately on receipt of the order or at some later time if the selected pickup time is not immediate.) For convenience, the goods are preferably first loaded in disposable paper or plastic bags that the customer can take home. Once the container 320 has been loaded, it is moved from the main storage area 308 to the intermediate area 310 to await customer pickup. Then upon arrival of the customer to pickup his or her goods, the container 320 is moved (preferably automatically) from the intermediate area 310 using the transfer mechanism 304 to the loading area 302 for pickup.”
Vallabh discloses or makes obvious an order delivery management unit configured to order the collection of the ordered items of an order in said storage facility and to control the activation of the router. See Figure 13, showing a computer system, in particular a “Central Controller 319” connected to the “Transfer System 304”. See also column 11, line 51, through column 12, line 4, beginning, “Once the central controller 319 has identified the customer”. See also column 12, lines 31-36, emphasis added), “The transfer system 304 preferably also includes container locating mechanisms 354 (preferably automated), which identify and load containers onto selected transporters leading to particular loading stations 318. The central controller 319 preferably controls the locating mechanisms 314.”
Vallabh discloses the existence of trunks of vehicles, causing delivery of orders to be delivery of orders ordered near a trunk of a vehicle, at least in many cases. Specifically, Vallabh discloses (column 13, lines 26-33, emphasis added), “As the shopper drives to the designated loading station 318, container(s) with the shopper’s goods are being transferred from the storage area to the loading station. At the loading station, the shopper opens his or her car (e.g., the car trunk) and loads goods from the container 320 if the loading station is a self-serve station. If the station is a full-serve station, personnel will be available to load the groceries in the customer’s vehicle.”
Vallabh does not disclose that the “merchandize pickup system” shown in Figure 12 involves actual parking spaces. However, Zelenskiy et al. (U.S. Patent 11,113,841) teaches parking spaces in the context of a system for picking up orders, e.g., in column 6, lines 1-5, emphasis added, “The vehicle 112 entering the parking area 102 may locate an available parking space (e.g., spaces 106, 122, 124) in the parking lots 104 and proceed to park. The camera 110 may capture an image of the parked vehicle 112 in one of the parking spaces.” Zelenskiy further teaches (column 6, lines 49-63, emphasis added), “Once the computer system 126 has been configured as described above, the system may utilize the camera 110 to detect when a customer has arrived and parked in a parking space (e.g., Parking Space D), and may then transmit this information to a staff person of the pick-up location 108. In some embodiments, the computer system 126 may do further processing of the license plate. For example, the system 126 may do image recognition of the characters on the license plate to determine the identity of the vehicle license plate. With that information, the system 126 may be able to match a particular parking space with a vehicle, and then further match the vehicle to a customer’s order. A staff member may be able to quickly deliver the customer’s order to the correct parking space where the customer’s vehicle is parked.” Further, Zelenskiy teaches (column 5, lines 53-55, emphasis added), “Continuing with the example of FIG. 1, the pick-up location 108 may be designed to receive orders from customers online.” The customer is thus a customer who has placed an order, so the camera and system for image recognition of Zelenskiy qualifies as a detector for detecting presence of a customer who has placed order in the vicinity of said parking space.
Neither Vallabh nor Zelenskiy expressly teaches each order picking station having an associated motor vehicle access and parking lane adjacent thereto, and each access lane comprises a first vehicle parking space and a second vehicle parking space, said second space being placed behind said first space in said lane. Figure 16 of Vallabh shows at least one lane. Vallabh discloses (column 11, lines 33-38, emphasis added), “For customer vehicles not equipped with an identification tag 342, a separate lane 380 is preferably provided having an input device 382 (such as a keypad) into which the customer can enter his or her identity. This information is also transmitted to the central control system.” Vallabh discloses (column 12, lines 5-12, emphasis added), “The system notifies the customer of the loading station 318 selected preferably by displaying the loading station number on a display 346 provided in each lane. The display can comprise, for example, an LCD or an LED display. (Alternatively, a single large display (not shown) can be provided for all lanes.) The display 346 can, e.g., provide the following sample message: ‘Mr. Doe, please proceed to Loading Station No. 2 to pickup your groceries.’” It is implied that Mr. Doe would park his vehicle at Loading Station No. 2, making it a parking space. For one vehicle parking space to be behind another is well known, as taught, for example in Wallat et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2014/0176716) (paragraph 30, emphasis added), “In another embodiment, attempting to acquire mirror width information can include instructing a vehicle operator to park the vehicle inside a particular parking space that has an empty parking space in front of it that shares a common straight line with the particular parking space.”
Vallabh does not disclose that the first signalling element and/or second signalling element comprises a terminal, but Kim et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2019/0377360) teaches (paragraph 100, emphasis added), “Meanwhile, the request for the item delivery service, which has been transmitted by the first terminal 420 to the server 410, includes information on the item 440, user information of the first terminal 420, and information on a pickup location and time of the item 440, and the like, which the user of the first terminal 420 intends to deliver to the other user of the second terminal 430. However, the information included in the request for the item delivery service is not limited thereto.” See also paragraph 138.
Vallabh does not disclose that the pick-up point comprises, for each access and parking lane, a signaling element which signals a number of vehicles parked in said access and parking lane. However, Bridgman teaches (paragraph 80, emphasis added), “After an order is at an order station 202, traffic directions are displayed at that signaling device 216 proximate to the order station 202 where the order has been placed, to prompt the vehicle having placed an order to moved [sic] further downstream. Such directions, for example, may be ‘Please proceed to the delivery window to pick up your order.’ This same message may be displayed at all further downstream unoccupied order stations 202 from the order station 202 where the order was placed. For example, if a vehicle 204 finishes placing an order at order station 202c, and order stations 202a and 202b are unoccupied, the message ‘Please proceed to the delivery window to pick up your order’ is displayed at the display of order station 202c, and preferably also 202b and 202a, and/or other traffic signaling devices 216a, 216b and 216c. By displaying such messages, a vehicle having placed an order will be remined to move downstream from in-line order area 200, and nor remain parked in in-line order area 200 for an excessive length of time.”
Thus, no limitation of claim 1 is entirely novel. However, there is insufficient teaching or motivation to combine the teachings of Zelenskiy, Wallat, Kim, and Bridgman with those of Vallabh to arrive at the specific system of claim 1. Therefore, claim 1 and its dependents are found non-obvious.
Claims 16-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101, but recite non-obvious subject matter.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of non-obvious subject matter: The closest prior art of record, Vallabh (U.S. Patent 7,054,832), discloses a system and corresponding method for delivery of orders ordered in line near a trunk of a vehicle (in that vehicles frequently have trunks), comprising a pick-up point having a plurality of order picking stations (column 9, lines 23-28, emphasis added), “The vehicle loading area 302 preferably comprises multiple loading stations 318 at which customers can pick up ordered goods. While the FIG. 12 shows three stations 312, it should be noted that any number could be provided as desired. Multiple loading stations are preferred to enable quick transfer of goods to customers.” Vallabh discloses an automated buffer storage facility of ordered items, and an automated router which routes said stored items from said buffer storage facility to said picking stations (column 10, lines 48-60, emphasis added), “After a customer order has been received, an available container 320 is associated with the order and loaded with the ordered goods. (Loading can be performed immediately on receipt of the order or at some later time if the selected pickup time is not immediate.) For convenience, the goods are preferably first loaded in disposable paper or plastic bags that the customer can take home. Once the container 320 has been loaded, it is moved from the main storage area 308 to the intermediate area 310 to await customer pickup. Then upon arrival of the customer to pickup his or her goods, the container 320 is moved (preferably automatically) from the intermediate area 310 using the transfer mechanism 304 to the loading area 302 for pickup.”
Vallabh discloses or makes obvious an order delivery management unit configured to order the collection of the ordered items of an order in said storage facility and to control the activation of the router. See Figure 13, showing a computer system, in particular a “Central Controller 319” connected to the “Transfer System 304”. See also column 11, line 51, through column 12, line 4, beginning, “Once the central controller 319 has identified the customer”. See also column 12, lines 31-36, emphasis added), “The transfer system 304 preferably also includes container locating mechanisms 354 (preferably automated), which identify and load containers onto selected transporters leading to particular loading stations 318. The central controller 319 preferably controls the locating mechanisms 314.”
Vallabh discloses the existence of trunks of vehicles, causing delivery of orders to be delivery of orders ordered near a trunk of a vehicle, at least in many cases. Specifically, Vallabh discloses (column 13, lines 26-33, emphasis added), “As the shopper drives to the designated loading station 318, container(s) with the shopper’s goods are being transferred from the storage area to the loading station. At the loading station, the shopper opens his or her car (e.g., the car trunk) and loads goods from the container 320 if the loading station is a self-serve station. If the station is a full-serve station, personnel will be available to load the groceries in the customer’s vehicle.”
Vallabh does not disclose that the “merchandize pickup system” shown in Figure 12 involves actual parking spaces. However, Zelenskiy et al. (U.S. Patent 11,113,841) teaches parking spaces in the context of a system for picking up orders, e.g., in column 6, lines 1-5, emphasis added, “The vehicle 112 entering the parking area 102 may locate an available parking space (e.g., spaces 106, 122, 124) in the parking lots 104 and proceed to park. The camera 110 may capture an image of the parked vehicle 112 in one of the parking spaces.” Zelenskiy further teaches (column 6, lines 49-63, emphasis added), “Once the computer system 126 has been configured as described above, the system may utilize the camera 110 to detect when a customer has arrived and parked in a parking space (e.g., Parking Space D), and may then transmit this information to a staff person of the pick-up location 108. In some embodiments, the computer system 126 may do further processing of the license plate. For example, the system 126 may do image recognition of the characters on the license plate to determine the identity of the vehicle license plate. With that information, the system 126 may be able to match a particular parking space with a vehicle, and then further match the vehicle to a customer’s order. A staff member may be able to quickly deliver the customer’s order to the correct parking space where the customer’s vehicle is parked.” Further, Zelenskiy teaches (column 5, lines 53-55, emphasis added), “Continuing with the example of FIG. 1, the pick-up location 108 may be designed to receive orders from customers online.” The customer is thus a customer who has placed an order, so the camera and system for image recognition of Zelenskiy qualifies as a detector for detecting presence of a customer who has placed order in the vicinity of said parking space.
Neither Vallabh nor Zelenskiy expressly teaches each order picking station having an associated motor vehicle access and parking lane adjacent thereto, and each access lane comprises a first vehicle parking space and a second vehicle parking space, said second space being placed behind said first space in said lane. Figure 16 of Vallabh shows at least one lane. Vallabh discloses (column 11, lines 33-38, emphasis added), “For customer vehicles not equipped with an identification tag 342, a separate lane 380 is preferably provided having an input device 382 (such as a keypad) into which the customer can enter his or her identity. This information is also transmitted to the central control system.” Vallabh discloses (column 12, lines 5-12, emphasis added), “The system notifies the customer of the loading station 318 selected preferably by displaying the loading station number on a display 346 provided in each lane. The display can comprise, for example, an LCD or an LED display. (Alternatively, a single large display (not shown) can be provided for all lanes.) The display 346 can, e.g., provide the following sample message: ‘Mr. Doe, please proceed to Loading Station No. 2 to pickup your groceries.’” It is implied that Mr. Doe would park his vehicle at Loading Station No. 2, making it a parking space. For one vehicle parking space to be behind another is well known, as taught, for example in Wallat et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2014/0176716) (paragraph 30, emphasis added), “In another embodiment, attempting to acquire mirror width information can include instructing a vehicle operator to park the vehicle inside a particular parking space that has an empty parking space in front of it that shares a common straight line with the particular parking space.”
Vallabh does not disclose that the first signalling element and/or the second signalling element comprises at least one of elements belonging to the group consisting of: bar code reader, QR code reader, magnetic strip or chip reader, numerical keyboard for entering a code, and biometric identification reader. However, Ducrou et al. (U.S. Patent 10,482,421) is directed to a system for expediting the delivery of items, and discloses, for example (column 4, lines 7-16, emphasis added), “Responding to this, the attendant may gather the items of the staged order and place them on the tote. The attendant may be waiting for the user at a predicted parking space or else arrive shortly thereafter at another parking space of the user’s selection. The attendant may acquire validation data from the user to confirm identity. For example, the attendant may ask the user to state their name. If the name corresponds to the name indicated by the dispatch data, the attendant may begin to load the items from the tote to the user’s vehicle.” Ducrou further discloses (column 17, lines 11-16, emphasis added), “The sensors 118 may include other sensors 118(5) as well. For example, other sensors 118(5) may include pneumatic road tube counters, ultrasonic rangefinders, thermometers, barometric sensors, hygrometers, rain gauges, biometric input devices including, but not limited to, fingerprint or palm scanners, and so forth.”
Vallabh does not disclose that the pick-up point comprises, for each access and parking lane, a signaling element which signals a number of vehicles parked in said access and parking lane. However, Bridgman et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2009/0255195) teaches (paragraph 80, emphasis added), “After an order is at an order station 202, traffic directions are displayed at that signaling device 216 proximate to the order station 202 where the order has been placed, to prompt the vehicle having placed an order to moved [sic] further downstream. Such directions, for example, may be ‘Please proceed to the delivery window to pick up your order.’ This same message may be displayed at all further downstream unoccupied order stations 202 from the order station 202 where the order was placed. For example, if a vehicle 204 finishes placing an order at order station 202c, and order stations 202a and 202b are unoccupied, the message ‘Please proceed to the delivery window to pick up your order’ is displayed at the display of order station 202c, and preferably also 202b and 202a, and/or other traffic signaling devices 216a, 216b and 216c. By displaying such messages, a vehicle having placed an order will be remined to move downstream from in-line order area 200, and nor remain parked in in-line order area 200 for an excessive length of time.”
Thus, no limitation of claim 16 is entirely novel. However, there is insufficient teaching or motivation to combine the teachings of Zelenskiy, Wallat, Ducrou, and Bridgman with those of Vallabh to arrive at the specific system of claim 16. Therefore, claim 16 and its dependents are found non-obvious.
Comments
Claim 10 was previously rejected under 35 U.SC. 103, and not having been amended, it is currently rejected under 35 U.SC. 103; its dependents, claims 11-15 are also rejected, using prior art previously applied to other dependent claims (depending from claim 1). As a result of the amendments of December 3, 2025, claims 1, 16, and their dependents are now found non-obvious. However, all of claims 1, 3-6, and 8-22 are now rejected under 35 U.SC. 101, as a result of Examiner’s second thoughts in light of recent guidance on what should and should not be rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS D ROSEN, whose telephone number is (571)272-6762. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 AM-5:30 PM, M-F. Non-official/draft communications may be faxed to the examiner at 571-273-6762, or emailed to Nicholas.Rosen@uspto.gov (in the body of an email, please, not as an attachment).
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, Marissa Thein, can be reached at 571-272-6764. 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.
/NICHOLAS D ROSEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3689 December 27, 2025