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 .
Foreign Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Status
Claims 1-6, 12-15, 18-22, 25, 32, and 34-36 are currently being examined. By Applicant’s amendment of May 23, 2023, claims 1-6, 12-15, 18-22, 25, 32, and 34-36 are pending following:
Claims 1, 4, 6, 12, 14, 15, 18, 22, 25, 32, and 34 have been amended
Claims 7-11, 16-17, 23-24, 26-31, and 33 have been cancelled
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 18, 21, 22, 25, 32, and 34-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 18 recites the limitation “…to classify the products to be stored into the first type of product to be stored and the second type of product to be stored according to at least one selected from shape information, popularity information, relevance information of the products…” Neither the claims nor specification provide details explaining what relevance means in this context or what reference point/parameter relevance of a product is evaluated from or associated with for comparison. The claim fails to define the metes and bounds of what is used to evaluate relevance, rendering the claim indefinite.
Claim 21 recites the limitation “…to classify the products to be stored into the first type of product to be stored and the second type of product to be stored according to at least one selected from shape information, popularity information, relevance information of the products…” Neither the claims nor specification provide details explaining what relevance means in this context or what reference point/parameter relevance of a product is evaluated from or associated with for comparison. The claim fails to define the metes and bounds of what is used to evaluate relevance, rendering the claim indefinite.
Independent claim 22 recites “a warehouse management method, performed by the warehouse management method according to claim 1….” Claim 1 recites a system with functional language, not a method. If the intent is to reference the structural components of the system as applied to a method recited in the body of the claim, the Office recommends “performed by the warehouse management system according to claim 1.”
Dependent claim 25 is rejected as being indefinite due to its dependence upon a rejected base claim, independent claim 22.
Independent claim 32 recites “a warehouse management method, performed by the warehouse management method according to claim 13….” Claim 13 recites a system with functional language, not a method. If the intent is to reference the structural components of the system as applied to a method recited in the body of the claim, the Office recommends “performed by the warehouse management system according to claim 13.”
Independent claim 34 recites “a warehouse management method, performed by the warehouse management method according to claim 19….” Claim 19 recites a system with functional language, not a method. If the intent is to reference the structural components of the system as applied to a method recited in the body of the claim, the Office recommends “performed by the warehouse management system according to claim 19.”
Dependent claims 35 and 36 are rejected as being indefinite due to their dependence upon a rejected base claim, independent claim 34.
Claim 36 recites the limitation “…to classify the products to be stored into the first type of product to be stored and the second type of product to be stored according to at least one selected from shape information, popularity information, relevance information of the products…” Neither the claims nor specification provide details explaining what relevance means in this context or what reference point/parameter relevance of a product is evaluated from or associated with for comparison. The claim fails to define the metes and bounds of what is used to evaluate relevance, rendering the claim indefinite.
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.
Claim(s) 13, 15 and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by over Li et al. (CN 109583800).
Regarding independent claim 13, Li et al. discloses:
A warehouse management system, comprising:
a control server, a first storage area, a second storage area, a first inventory receptacle handling device and a second inventory receptacle handling device, wherein a first inventory receptacle is arranged in the first storage area, a second inventory receptacle is arranged in the second storage area, a workstation is arranged and shared by the first storage area and the second storage area, and the first inventory receptacle handling device and the second inventory receptacle handling device are communicatively connected to the control server; [See at least Fig. 10, Ref. Numerals 1800 (shelf storage locations; first and second storage areas), 1030 (handling robots moving to/from storage areas and workstations and communicatively connected to control server/sorting management device), 1020 (sorting management device); Par. 0017, 0159-0166]
wherein the control server is configured to, when it is determined that products in an inventory task are to be selected from both the first inventory receptacle in the first storage area and the second inventory receptacle in the second storage area, dispatch the inventory task to a workstation according to the inventory task, send a first handling instruction to the first inventory receptacle handling device, and send a second handling instruction to the second inventory receptacle handling device; [See at least Par. 0069-0073, 0088-0091, 0129-0137; where each of a plurality handling robots are selected to move inventory shelves to/from respective storage areas to/from each of a plurality of selected workstations]
the first inventory receptacle handling device is configured to transport a specified first inventory receptacle from the first storage area to the workstation in response to the first handling instruction; [See at least Par. 0069-0073, 0088-0091, 0129-0137; where each of a plurality handling robots are selected to move inventory shelves to/from respective storage areas to/from each of a plurality of selected workstations] and
the second inventory receptacle handling device is configured to transport a specified second inventory receptacle from the second storage area to the workstation in response to the second handling instruction. [See at least Par. 0069-0073, 0088-0091, 0129-0137; where each of a plurality handling robots are selected to move inventory shelves to/from respective storage areas to/from each of a plurality of selected workstations]
Li et al. disclose multiple storage areas, multiple handling robots and multiple workstations, encompassing configurations in which items are transported from the storage areas to individual workstations or a single (shared) workstation under BRI for examination purposes.
Regarding claim 15, Li et al. discloses:
The warehouse management system according to claim 13, wherein the first inventory receptacle is a movable inventory shelf, and the first inventory receptacle handling device is a shelf handling robot [See at least Fig. 10, Ref. Numeral 1030 (handling robots), 1040 (inventory shelf); Par. 0162]; and
the shelf handling robot is further configured to transport a specified movable inventory shelf from the first storage area to the workstation in response to the first handling instruction; [See at least Par. 0009, 0069-0070, 0161-0162]
wherein the second inventory receptacle is an inventory tote, and the second inventory receptacle handling device is a tote handling robot [See at least Par. 0011]; and
the tote handling robot is further configured to transport a specified inventory tote from the second storage area to the workstation in response to the second handling instruction. [See at least Par. 0011]
Independent claim 32 recites a method reciting the same structure and steps performed by the warehouse management system of claim 13. Independent claim 32 is rejected on the same basis as claim 13 as unpatentable over Li et al.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-5, 12, 14, 18-22, and 34-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (CN 109583800) in view of Lu et al. (CN 111861325).
Regarding independent claim 1, Li et al. discloses:
A warehouse management system, comprising:
a control server, a first storage area, a second storage area, a first inventory receptacle handling device, a second inventory receptacle handling device and an order receptacle handling device, wherein a first inventory receptacle and a first workstation are arranged in the first storage area, a second inventory receptacle and a second workstation are arranged in the second storage area, and the first inventory receptacle handling device and the second inventory receptacle handling device are communicatively connected to the control server; [See at least Fig. 10, Ref. Numerals 1800 (shelf storage locations; first and second storage areas), 1030 (handling robots moving to/from storage areas, workstations and collection points – Par. 0157 & 0161; communicatively connected to control server/sorting management device), 1020 (sorting management device), 1070 (parcel racks) 1080 (collection points); Par. 0017, 0157-0166]
wherein the control server is configured to:
send a third handling instruction to the order receptacle handling device after determining that a selecting task corresponding to one sub-order of the two sub-orders is completed; [See at least Par. 0127, 0153, 0154]
wherein the first inventory receptacle handling device is configured to, when the first sub-order is dispatched to the first workstation in the first storage area, transport a specified first inventory receptacle from the first storage area to the first workstation in response to the first handling instruction; [See at least Par. 0069-0073, 0088-0091, 0129-0137; where each of a plurality handling robots are selected to move inventory shelves from respective storage areas to each of a plurality of selected workstations]
wherein the second inventory receptacle handling device is configured to, when the second sub-order is dispatched to the second workstation in the second storage area, transport a specified second inventory receptacle from the second storage area to the second workstation in response to the second handling instruction; [See at least Par. 0069-0073, 0088-0091, 0129-0137; where each of a plurality handling robots are selected to move inventory shelves from respective storage areas to each of a plurality of selected workstations] and
wherein the order receptacle handling device is configured to, in response to the third handling instruction, transport a first order receptacle containing a first product selected at the first workstation to the second workstation, or transport a second order receptacle containing a second product selected at the second workstation to the first workstation, or transport the first order receptacle containing the first product selected at the first workstation and the second order receptacle containing the second product selected at the second workstation to a specified confluence location to complete order consolidation. [See at least Par. 0011, 0017, 0076, 0114, 0161, 0164]
For examination purposes, the handling robots of Li et al., as disclosed in at least Par. 0157 and 0161 describe the goods handling equipment moving between storage locations and workstations as being the same or different handling robots as the parcel handling equipment moving between workstations and collection points, fulfilling the inventory receptacle handling devices and order receptacle handling device limitations.
While Li et al. discloses the warehouse management system, Li et al. does not disclose classifying products and splitting tasks. In regard to these limitations, Lu et al., directed to the same technology — warehouse management, storage, sorting and control — teaches:
wherein the control server is configured to: when it is determined that order products in an order task are to be selected from both the first inventory receptacle in the first storage area and the second inventory receptacle in the second storage area, split the order task into a first sub- order and a second sub-order according to the order task, dispatch the first sub-order to the first workstation located in the first storage area, and send a first handling instruction to the first inventory receptacle handling device, dispatch the second sub-order to the second workstation located in the second storage area, and send a second handling instruction to the second inventory receptacle handling device, and [See at least 0010-0020, 0118-0130]
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Li et al. to incorporate the teachings of Lu et al. and combine the classification of products and splitting of tasks with the warehouse sorting and management system of Li et al. The classification of products and splitting of tasks of Lu et al. allows additional flexibility in storage of goods, enabling increased speed and efficiency.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have had the capability to combine the classification of products and splitting of tasks of Lu et al. with the warehouse sorting and management system of Li et al. and would have recognized that the combination would yield predictable results. Even in the combined context, the features of the warehouse sorting and management system of Li et al. and the features of the classification of products and splitting of tasks of Lu et al. would be expected to function as intended, with each element in the combined context performing the same function as it did separately.
A person of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to incorporate the teachings of Lu et al. because they are a known work in the same field of endeavor directed to the same technology (warehouse management, storage, sorting and control), which would prompt its use based on design improvements that are predictable and recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 2, Li et al. discloses:
The warehouse management system according to claim 1, wherein the first inventory receptacle is a movable inventory shelf, and the first inventory receptacle handling device is a shelf handling robot [See at least Fig. 10, Ref. Numeral 1030 (handling robots), 1040 (inventory shelf); Par. 0162]; and
the shelf handling robot is further configured to transport a specified movable inventory shelf from the first storage area to the first workstation in response to the first handling instruction. [See at least Par. 0009, 0069-0070, 0161-0162]
Lu et al. also teaches a first and second type of inventory receptacle and first and second type of mobile robot to transport the respective inventory receptacles to the workstations, in at least Par. 0109.
Regarding claim 3, Li et al. discloses:
The warehouse management system according to claim 1, wherein the second inventory receptacle is an inventory tote, and the second inventory receptacle handling device is a tote handling robot [See at least Par. 0011]; and
the tote handling robot is further configured to transport a specified inventory tote from the second storage area to the second workstation in response to the second handling instruction. [See at least Par. 0011]
Lu et al. also teaches a first and second type of inventory receptacle and first and second type of mobile robot to transport the respective inventory receptacles to the workstations, in at least Par. 0109.
Regarding claim 4, Li et al. discloses:
The warehouse management system according to claim 1, wherein the order receptacle is a movable order shelf, an order tote, or a movable order shelf provided with an order tote. [See at least Par. 0061]
Regarding claim 5, Li et al. discloses:
The warehouse management system according to claim 4, wherein the order receptacle handling device is a shelf handling robot or a tote handling robot. [See at least Par. 0074]
Claims 7-11 were cancelled.
Regarding claim 12, Li et al. discloses:
The warehouse management system according to claim 5 wherein:
the shelf handling robot is configured to transport the movable order shelf selected at the first workstation to the specified confluence location to complete the order consolidation; [See at least Par. 0009] or
the tote handling robot is configured to transport the order tote selected at the second workstation to the specified confluence location to complete the order consolidation. [See at least Par. 0011]
Regarding claim 14, Li et al. discloses:
The warehouse management system according to claim 13, wherein the inventory task comprises at least one selected from a storage task, an order task or a combination thereof, [See at least Par. 0072, 0073] and
While Li et al. discloses the warehouse management system of claim 13 and inventory tasks comprising one or a combination of storage and order tasks, Li et al. does not disclose classifying products and splitting tasks. In regard to these limitations, Lu et al., directed to the same technology — warehouse management, storage, sorting and control — teaches:
wherein the control server is further configured to, in the case that the inventory task is the storage task, classify products to be stored into a first type of product to be stored of the first storage area and a second type of product to be stored of the second storage area according to a preset product classification rule, split the storage task into a first subtask for storing the first type of product to be stored and a second subtask for storing the second type of product to be stored, and dispatch the first subtask and the second subtask to the workstation. [See at least 0010-0020, 0118-0130]
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Li et al. to incorporate the teachings of Lu et al. and combine the classification of products and splitting of tasks with the warehouse sorting and management system of Li et al. The classification of products and splitting of tasks of Lu et al. allows additional flexibility in storage of goods, enabling increased speed and efficiency.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have had the capability to combine the classification of products and splitting of tasks of Lu et al. with the warehouse sorting and management system of Li et al. and would have recognized that the combination would yield predictable results. Even in the combined context, the features of the warehouse sorting and management system of Li et al. and the features of the classification of products and splitting of tasks of Lu et al. would be expected to function as intended, with each element in the combined context performing the same function as it did separately.
A person of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to incorporate the teachings of Lu et al. because they are a known work in the same field of endeavor directed to the same technology (warehouse management, storage, sorting and control), which would prompt its use based on design improvements that are predictable and recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claims 16-17 were cancelled.
Regarding claim 18, Lu et al. teaches what Li et al. lacks:
The warehouse management system according to claim 14, wherein the control server is further configured to classify the products to be stored into the first type of product to be stored and the second type of product to be stored according to at least one selected from shape information, popularity information, relevance information of the products or any combination thereof. [See at least Par. 0016, 0017]
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Li et al. to incorporate the teachings of Lu et al. as discussed above, see claim 14.
Regarding independent claim 19, Li et al. discloses:
A warehouse management system, comprising:
a control server, a first storage area, a second storage area, a first inventory receptacle handling device, and a second inventory receptacle handling device, wherein a first inventory receptacle and a first workstation are arranged in the first storage area, a second inventory receptacle and a second workstation are arranged in the second storage area, and the first inventory receptacle handling device and the second inventory receptacle handling device are communicatively connected with the control server; [See at least Fig. 10, Ref. Numerals 1800 (shelf storage locations; first and second storage areas), 1030 (handling robots moving to/from storage areas and workstations and communicatively connected to control server/sorting management device), 1020 (sorting management device); Par. 0017, 0159-0166]
wherein the first inventory receptacle handling device is configured to, when the first subtask is dispatched to the first workstation of the first storage area, transport a specified first inventory receptacle from the first storage area to the first workstation in response to the first handling instruction; [See at least Par. 0069-0073, 0088-0091, 0129-0137; where each of a plurality handling robots are selected to move inventory shelves to/from respective storage areas to/from each of a plurality of selected workstations] and
wherein the second inventory receptacle handling device is configured to, when the second subtask is dispatched to the second workstation of the second storage area, transport a specified second inventory receptacle from the second storage area to the second workstation in response to the second handling instruction. [See at least Par. 0069-0073, 0088-0091, 0129-0137; where each of a plurality handling robots are selected to move inventory shelves to/from respective storage areas to/from each of a plurality of selected workstations]
Li et al. disclose multiple storage areas, multiple handling robots and multiple workstations, encompassing configurations in which items are transported from the storage areas to individual workstations or a single (shared) workstation under BRI for examination purposes.
While Li et al. discloses the warehouse management system, Li et al. does not disclose classifying products and splitting tasks. In regard to these limitations, Lu et al., directed to the same technology — warehouse management, storage, sorting and control — teaches:
wherein the control server is configured to: classify products to be stored of a storage task into a first type of product to be stored of the first storage area and a second type of product to be stored of the second storage area according to a preset product classification rule, split the storage task into a first subtask and a second subtask, dispatch the first subtask to the first workstation located in the first storage area, and send a first handling instruction to the first inventory receptacle handling device, and dispatch the second subtask to the second workstation located in the second storage area, and send a second handling instruction to the second inventory receptacle handling device; [See at least 0010-0020, 0118-0130]
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Li et al. to incorporate the teachings of Lu et al. and combine the classification of products and splitting of tasks with the warehouse sorting and management system of Li et al. The classification of products and splitting of tasks of Lu et al. allows additional flexibility in storage of goods, enabling increased speed and efficiency.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have had the capability to combine the classification of products and splitting of tasks of Lu et al. with the warehouse sorting and management system of Li et al. and would have recognized that the combination would yield predictable results. Even in the combined context, the features of the warehouse sorting and management system of Li et al. and the features of the classification of products and splitting of tasks of Lu et al. would be expected to function as intended, with each element in the combined context performing the same function as it did separately.
A person of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to incorporate the teachings of Lu et al. because they are a known work in the same field of endeavor directed to the same technology (warehouse management, storage, sorting and control), which would prompt its use based on design improvements that are predictable and recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 20, Li et al. discloses:
The warehouse management system according to claim 19, wherein the control server is further configured to send a third handling instruction to the first inventory receptacle handling device after the first subtask is completed, and send a fourth handling instruction to the second inventory receptacle handling device after the second subtask is completed; [See at least Par. 0072, 0148, 0162]
the first inventory receptacle handling device is further configured to transport the specified first inventory receptacle from the first workstation to a specified location of the first storage area in response to the third handling instruction; [See at least Par. 0072, 0148, 0162], and
the second inventory receptacle handling device is further configured to transport the specified second inventory receptacle from the second workstation to a specified location of the second storage area in response to the fourth handling instruction. [See at least Par. 0072, 0148, 0162]
Regarding claim 21, Lu et al. teaches what Li et al. lacks:
The warehouse management system according to claim 19, wherein the control server is further configured to classify the products to be stored into the first type of product to be stored and the second type of product to be stored according to at least one selected from shape information, popularity information, relevance information of the products or any combination thereof. [See at least Par. 0016, 0017]
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Li et al. to incorporate the teachings of Lu et al. as discussed above, see claim 19.
Independent claim 22 recites a method reciting the same structure and steps performed by the warehouse management system of claim 1. Independent claim 22 is rejected on the same basis as claim 1 as unpatentable over Li et al. in view of Lu et al.
Claims 23-24 were cancelled.
Claims 26-31 were cancelled.
Claim 33 was cancelled.
Independent claim 34 recites a method reciting the same structure and steps performed by the warehouse management system of claim 19. Independent claim 34 is rejected on the same basis as claim 19 as unpatentable over Li et al. in view of Lu et al.
Regarding claim 35, Li et al. discloses:
The warehouse management method according to claim 34, wherein the control server is configured to send a third handling instruction to the first inventory receptacle handling device after the first subtask is completed, and send a fourth handling instruction to the second inventory receptacle handling device after the second subtask is completed; [See at least Par. 0072, 0148, 0162]
the first inventory receptacle handling device is configured to transport the specified first inventory receptacle from the first workstation to a specified location of the first storage area in response to the third handling instruction; and the second inventory receptacle handling device is configured to transport the specified second inventory receptacle from the second workstation to a specified location of the second storage area in response to the fourth handling instruction. [See at least Par. 0072, 0148, 0162]
Regarding claim 36, Lu et al. teaches what Li et al. lacks:
The warehouse management system according to claim 34, wherein the control server is configured to classify the products to be stored into the first type of product to be stored and the second type of product to be stored according to at least one selected from shape information, popularity information, relevance information of the products or any combination thereof. [See at least Par. 0016, 0017]
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Li et al. to incorporate the teachings of Lu et al. as discussed above, see claim 19.
Claims 6 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (CN 109583800) in view of Lu et al. (CN 111861325) and further in view of Winkler et al. (US 2022/0332508).
Regarding claim 6, Li et al. discloses:
The warehouse management system according to claim 5, wherein:
the shelf handling robot is configured to transport the movable order shelf [See at least Par. 0009, 0069-0070, 0161-0162]
the tote handling robot is configured to transport the order tote [See at least Par. 0011]
While Li et al. and Lu et al. disclose the warehouse management system and transporting the order shelves and totes, they focus on transporting from the workstations to/from storage areas or collection points, and do not explicitly disclose transporting between first and second workstations. In regard to these limitations, Winkler et al., directed to the same technology — warehouse management, storage, sorting and control — teaches:
selected at the first workstation to the second workstation; [See at least Par. 0071, 0137, 0198] or
selected at the second workstation to the first workstation. [See at least Par. 0071, 0137, 0198]
For examination purposes, transporting from the second workstation to the first workstation represents a mere reversal of the step of transporting from the first workstation to the second workstation and is also fulfilled by the combination of Li et al., Lu et al., and Winkler et al.
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Li et al. and Lu et al. to incorporate the teachings of Winkler et al. and combine the transport between workstations with the warehouse sorting and management system of Li et al. and Lu et al. The transport between workstations of Winkler et al. allows additional flexibility in storage of goods, enabling increased speed and efficiency.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have had the capability to combine the transport between workstations of Winkler et al. with the warehouse sorting and management system of Li et al. and Lu et al. and would have recognized that the combination would yield predictable results. Even in the combined context, the features of the warehouse sorting and management system of Li et al. and Lu et al. and the features of the transport between workstations of Winkler et al. would be expected to function as intended, with each element in the combined context performing the same function as it did separately.
A person of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to incorporate the teachings of Winkler et al. because they are a known work in the same field of endeavor directed to the same technology (warehouse management, storage, sorting and control), which would prompt its use based on design improvements that are predictable and recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 25, Li et al. discloses:
The warehouse management method according to claim 22, wherein the order receptacle is a movable order shelf, an order tote, or an order shelf provided with an order tote [See at least Par. 0061]; the order receptacle handling device is a shelf handling robot or a tote handling robot; [See at least Par. 0074]
the shelf handling robot is configured to transport the movable order shelf [See at least Par. 0009, 0069-0070, 0161-0162]
the tote handling robot is configured to transport the order tote [See at least Par. 0011]
While Li et al. and Lu et al. disclose the warehouse management system and transporting the order shelves and totes, they focus on transporting from the workstations to/from storage areas or collection points, and do not explicitly disclose transporting between first and second workstations. In regard to these limitations, Winkler et al., directed to the same technology — warehouse management, storage, sorting and control — teaches:
selected at the first workstation to the second workstation; [See at least Par. 0071, 0137, 0198] or
selected at the second workstation to the first workstation. [See at least Par. 0071, 0137, 0198]
For examination purposes, transporting from the second workstation to the first workstation represents a mere reversal of the step of transporting from the first workstation to the second workstation and is also fulfilled by the combination of Li et al., Lu et al., and Winkler et al.
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Li et al. and Lu et al. to incorporate the teachings of Winkler et al. as discussed above, see claim 6.
Examiner's Note
Prior Art: Examiner has cited particular paragraphs and figures in the references as applied to the claims set forth hereinabove for the convenience of the Applicant. While the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claims, other passages and figures in the cited references may be applicable, as well. It is respectfully requested that the Applicant, in preparing any response to the Office Action, fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, in addition to the context of the passage(s) as taught by the prior art or as disclosed by the Examiner. Applicant is reminded that the Examiner is required to give the broadest reasonable interpretation to the language of the claims. Furthermore, the Examiner is not limited to Applicant’s definitions that are not specifically set forth in the claims.
English Translations: If a prior art reference has been relied upon to map the claim limitations that is in a language other than English, Examiner has provided both the original reference and an English translation of the reference as attachments to the Office Action. Applicant is encouraged to refer to the provided English translation for cited pages and/or paragraphs in the mapping of prior art to claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure [See PTO-892 Notice of References Cited] because the prior art references contain subject matter that relates to one or more of Applicant’s claim limitations.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Erin Morris whose telephone number is (703)756-1112. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 0900-1700 EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jacob Scott can be reached at (571) 270-3415. 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.
/EM/Examiner, Art Unit 3655
/JACOB S. SCOTT/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3655