Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/251,615

A DISTRIBUTION DOCK, A DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM AND A METHOD THEREOF

Final Rejection §102§112
Filed
May 03, 2023
Examiner
HAGEMAN, MARK C
Art Unit
3652
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Autostore Technology As
OA Round
2 (Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allow Rate
563 granted / 765 resolved
+21.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+12.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
789
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
35.0%
-5.0% vs TC avg
§102
29.0%
-11.0% vs TC avg
§112
29.8%
-10.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 765 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
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 . 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. Claim 14 is 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. Regarding claim 14, the phrase "optionally" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). 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) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by WO2020/074242 to Austrheim. Citations below to US 12,071,305 for column and line numbers where needed. Regarding claim 1 Austrheim discloses a distribution dock comprising: a dock for handling and providing access to storage containers of a mobile storage system, the dock (600) comprising a framework structure of upright members and a first rail system arranged on the upright members of the framework structure comprising a set of parallel rails arranged to guide movement of a container handling vehicle (201 and figures 7-9) in a direction across the top of the framework structure at least one container handling vehicle (201) configured to operate on the first rail system at least one interface (450) comprising a set of parallel tracks configured to connect the first rail system of the dock to a second rail system of a mobile storage system such that the container handling vehicle can retrieve storage containers from the mobile storage system (see figure 11). Regarding claim 2 Austrheim discloses the first rail system comprises a grid of a first set of parallel rails arranged to guide movement of a container handling vehicle (201) in a first direction across the top of the framework structure, and a second set of parallel rails arranged perpendicular to the first set of rails to guide movement of the container handling vehicle in a second direction which is perpendicular to the first direction, the first and second sets of parallel rails dividing the first rail system into a plurality of grid cells (see figures 7-9). Regarding claim 3 Austrheim discloses the first rail system comprises two interfaces for connecting the first rail system to two different mobile storage systems (450, figure 11). Regarding claim 4 Austrheim discloses the distribution dock comprises a local control unit configured to receive and process information regarding the size, layout and placement of storage containers in the at least one mobile storage system such that the at least one container handling vehicle can operate on a second rail system of the at least one mobile storage system (col. 15 lines 47-53 and col. 17 lines 27-32). Regarding claim 5 Austrheim discloses the local control unit is configured to be connected to a central control unit, where the central control unit generates instructions for at least partly operating the distribution dock (col. 15 lines 47-53 and col. 17 lines 27-32). Regarding claim 6 Austrheim discloses the dock is an island within the distribution dock comprising the framework structure to define columns configured to receive storage containers from the at least one container handling vehicle (figures 9, 10 and 12). Regarding claim 7 Austrheim discloses at least some of the columns are available for use as storage columns for stacks of the storage containers (figures 9, 10 and 12). Regarding claim 8 Austrheim discloses the dock comprises no more than twelve columns in a direction of the tracks of the interface (figures 9, 10 and 12). Regarding claim 9 Austrheim discloses the dock comprises an access station (509 figures 7 and 9) arranged at a level below a level of the first rail system for allowing access to a storage container delivered to the access station by the at least one container handling vehicle. Regarding claim 10 Austrheim discloses the interface comprises a protruding male part provided with tracks for the at least one container handling vehicle to move along and configured to connect to a second rail system comprising a receiving female part comprising a recess (see figure 11, 450). Regarding claim 11 Austrheim discloses the protruding male part comprises a gang plank hinged to the dock that is provided with tracks for the at least one container handling vehicle to move along (see figure 11d). Regarding claim 12 Austrheim discloses the interface comprises a receiving female part (see figure 11d) comprising a recess configured to connect with a protruding male part provided with tracks for the at least one container handling vehicle of a second rail system (see figure 11d). Regarding claim 13 Austrheim further discloses at least one mobile storage system (see figure 10 and discussion above regarding claim 1). Regarding claim 14 Austrheim discloses the at least one mobile storage system is a vehicular mobile storage system optionally a lorry trailer mounted storage system (see figure 8). Regarding claim 15 Austrheim discloses the at least one mobile storage system comprises a framework structure comprising upright members defining multiple storage columns, in which storage containers can be stored one on top of another in vertical stacks and the second rail system comprising a grid of a first set of parallel rails arranged to guide movement of container handling vehicles in a first direction across the top of the framework structure, and a second set of parallel rails arranged perpendicular to the first set of rails to guide movement of the at least one container handling vehicle in a second direction which is perpendicular to the first direction, the first and second sets of parallel rails dividing the rail system into a plurality of grid cells (see figure 8). Regarding claim 16 Austrheim discloses the first rail system of the dock and the second rail system of the at least one mobile storage system are of the same gauge and when interconnected by the tracks of the at least one interface form an operating area for the at least one container handling vehicle, wherein the operating area comprises a mobile storage area and a distribution area, and wherein the distribution area is smaller than the mobile storage area of the at least one mobile storage system (see figure 10). Regarding claim 17 Austrheim discloses the dock of the distribution dock comprises fewer storage spaces for storing containers than any one of the at least one mobile storage system (see figure 10). Regarding claim 18 Austrheim discloses the first rail system is supported by the dock at a level which corresponds to a level of the second rail system of the at least one mobile storage system and the tracks of the at least one interface extend in a substantially horizontal direction from either the first rail system to the second rail system, or from the second rail system to the first rail system to link rails of the first rail system to rails of the second rail system (see figure 11). Regarding claim 19 Austrheim discloses a face of the dock and a face of the at least one mobile storage system linked by the interface correspond in width such that the first rail system comprises the same number of rows of rails that are parallel to the tracks of the interface as the number of rows of rails of the second rail system which are parallel to the tracks of the interface (see figure 11). Regarding claim 20 Austrheim discloses the distribution dock comprises at least two separate interfaces configured to connect the first rail system to at least two separate second rail systems of at least two mobile storage systems (see figure 10). Regarding claim 21 Austrheim discloses a first mobile storage system comprises an interface configured to connect it's second rail system to the first rail system and a second mobile storage system comprises an interface configured to connect it's second rail system to the second rail system of the first mobile storage system (see figures 10-11). Regarding claim 22 Austrheim discloses a method of operating a distribution system comprising arranging at least one mobile storage system at a predetermined distance to the first rail system of the dock connecting the second rail system of the mobile storage system and the first rail system using the at least one interface such that the at least one container handling vehicle can retrieve storage containers from the mobile storage system (use of the system and movement of 201 between rails systems). Regarding claim 23 Austrheim discloses arranging a second mobile storage system at a predetermined distance to the first rail system connecting the second rail system of the second mobile storage system and the first rail system using a second interface such that the at least one container handling vehicle can operate on and between the first rail system and the mobile storage systems transferring storage containers between the at least two mobile storage systems using the at least one container handling vehicle (see figure 10 and general operation of the system). Regarding claim 24 Austrheim discloses arranging a second mobile storage system at a predetermined distance to the first mobile storage system connecting the second rail system of the second mobile storage system with the second rail system of the first mobile storage system using an interface arranged on either the first or second mobile storage system such that the at least one container handling vehicle can operate on and between the first rail system and the second rail systems of the mobile storage systems transferring storage containers between the at least two mobile storage systems using the at least one container handling vehicle (see figure 10 and general operation of the system). Regarding claim 25 Austrheim discloses providing information to a local control unit regarding the size, layout and placement of storage containers in the at least one mobile storage system providing information to the local control unit regarding the reallocation of storage containers in the at least one mobile storage system (col. 15 lines 47-53 and col. 17 lines 27-32). Regarding claim 26 Austrheim discloses using the local control unit to process said information and generate orders to the containers handling vehicles to move the storage containers accordingly determining, using the local control unit, which storage containers to transfer between the first storage system and the dock and/or between the at least two mobile storage systems (col. 15 lines 47-53 and col. 17 lines 27-32). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Additional references show other rail-based docks for transferring articles to vehicles. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARK C HAGEMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-5547. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:15-4:45 (PST). Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Saul Rodriguez can be reached at 571-272-7097. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /MARK C HAGEMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3652
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 03, 2023
Application Filed
Jun 04, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112
Jul 28, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 03, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §112
Apr 04, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595129
STATION FOR PRESENTING CONTAINERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12583673
AN ACCESS STATION FOR AN AUTOMATED STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR USING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577088
INDUSTRIAL TRUCK COMPRISING A LOAD FRAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12577046
A Load Handling Device
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12576671
TIRE HANDLER HAVING TIRE LAY FLAT CAPABILITY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
74%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+12.4%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 765 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month