DETAILED ACTION
This is a Final office action on the merits in application number 18/281,254. This action is in response to Applicant’s Amendments and Arguments dated 3/17/2026. Claims 1, 10, 11, 14 and 15 were amended and no claims were cancelled. Claims 1-15 are pending and have been examined on the merits.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant asserts on page 6 of their remarks dated 3/17/2026 that the art of record does not teach the newly added “communicate with one or more autonomous delivery vehicles in order to direct the one or more autonomous delivery vehicles to the one or more automated pick-up stations to receive one or more orders”. Examiner agrees and, as necessitated by amendment, now asserts the art of record in view of Baalke, as discussed in the 35 USC 103 rejection, infra, teaches this element.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-7, 10 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent 5,158,155 (Domain) in view of U.S. Patent Publication 2018/0329418 (Baalke).
Regarding Claim 1:
Domain teaches a multi-vendor, multi-story drive through vending complex. Domain teaches: A multi-vendor drive-through complex for multiple vendors providing goods to users, wherein the multi-vendor drive-through complex comprises: one or more floors occupied by one or more vendors; ([Column 9, lines 13-17] “a structural complex that enables consumers to purchase goods and services from a single large vendor of various goods or from a variety of individual vendors of goods and services without exiting their vehicles and entering the Complex” and [Column 9, lines 47-49] “a structure having two floors, although a warehouse having three floors may be employed”).
one or more drive-through lanes located below the one or more floors; pick-up stations in the one or more drive-through lanes for storing orders, ([Column 5, lines 10-14] “On completing a purchase transaction at the customer order station, the customer is then directed to one of the nine pick-up stations provided beneath the Vendors' Complex. The customer receives instructions from the order clerk as to which pick up station to drive to”).
wherein the pick-up stations at least comprise one or more automated pick-up stations, [Column 19, line 68 – Column 20, line 5] “The dumbwaiter elevator will deliver the ordered goods down to the drawer 68 of the assigned pick-up station location, and the drawer will automatically extend outward to present the ordered goods to the customer waiting at the pick-up station”).
and wherein the orders comprise one or more goods provided by the one or more vendors; ([Column 19, lines 29-31] “Each of the individual vendors will then assemble their ordered goods”).
and one or more vertical transport systems for delivering the orders to the one or more pick-up stations and ([Column 19, lines 53-4] “dumbwaiter elevator of the assigned pick-up station”).
and a complex operation system comprising: at least one network communication interface; at least one non-transitory memory storage device having computer readable program-code stored thereon; and at least one processing device coupled to the at least one non-transitory memory storage device and the at least one network communication interface, (see at least [Column 6, lines 57-64] “The operations of the Vendors' Complex are overseen by a primary computer that monitors the business operations and transactions and the data storage of the Complex. The primary computer also interfaces with the traffic control lights and traffic sensors and controls the sequence of operation of the traffic lights to maintain an ordered flow of customer traffic through the Vendor's Complex” and also [Column 7, line 9] “computerized information network”).
wherein when executed the computer readable program-code is configured to cause the at least one processing device to: communicate with one or more … vehicles in order to direct the one or more… vehicles to the one or more automated pick-up stations to receive one or more orders for the one or more… vehicles. Examiner is interpreting that the broadest reasonable interpretation of the terms “(system) communicate(s)… to direct…vehicle to… pickup station(s) to receive… order” includes a computer network that controls traffic control elements such as traffic lights and traffic signs that have the function of communicating a direction of travel to a driver of a particular vehicle to direct the driver to drive the particular vehicle to a particular pick-up station to pick up that driver’s order. This interpretation is reasonable in view of Applicant’s specification at ([0109] “Moreover, due to the traffic that may be running through the complex at times, the complex may have additional lanes and traffic control elements, which may communicate with and/or work independently from or in conjunction with traffic control elements (e.g., lights, signs, merging, or the like) in the surrounding streets (e.g., corner streets, multiple streets surrounding a portion or all of the complex, or the like). As such, the complex may control the timing of when user (e.g., user vehicles, bicycle, scooter, lanes) and/or autonomous delivery vehicles enter and/or leave the complex. For example, as users and/or autonomous delivery vehicles enter the property of the complex, the drive-through systems 203 may hold the vehicles in staging areas before the vehicles are directed to particular lanes and/or pick-up stations. (Examiner emphasis). The flow of vehicles can be sped up or slowed down in the staging areas, in the lanes, and/or in access lanes to control the flow of vehicles entering, located within, and/or leaving the property. The movement of the vehicles may be based at least in part based on information received from surrounding traffic systems (e.g., lights, cameras, sensors, or the like) to determine when traffic is clear/reduced and/or heavy/backed-up on the surrounding streets”). Examiner notes that this portion of Applicant’s disclosure does not teach nor imply that Applicant’s system electronically controls one or all autonomous vehicles within the complex, it only teaches general traffic control of all manned and unmanned vehicles using traffic lights. Examiner further notes that Applicant also recites in their specification ([00142] “the drive- through system 203, traffic control elements 1424, user computer systems 400 (e.g., GPS, other location determination devices), autonomous vehicle systems, other systems described herein, or the like, may communicate with each other in order to direct the flow of traffic through the property”). Examiner holds that Applicant’s paragraph [00142] broadly describes communication between various systems “to direct the flow of traffic through the property”. Examiner holds that “through the property” is materially different from directing a particular vehicle to a particular pick-up station to pick up a particular order, as Applicant appears to imply in their claimed language. Examiner holds that the only support for the claimed in order to direct the one or more… vehicles to the one or more automated pick-up stations to receive one or more orders for the one or more… vehicles is in Applicant’s [0109] that teaches traffic control lights and signs that communicate with “users and/or autonomous delivery vehicles” to direct them “to particular lanes and/or pick-up stations”.
Domain teaches this: (see at least [Column 17, lines 36-54]) “Customers entering the vehicle routing lanes 18 of the Vendors' Complex along the right hand express lane 148 first encounter an express window control display 158 directing the customers to stop their vehicles in an express stacking area 162 until their desired express window (not shown) along the express lane 164 has opened. The express window control display 158 alternately displays a green or red light to direct customers in the stacking area 162 of the express lane to wait in the stacking area until their desired express window has opened and the vehicle last accessing the desired express window has exited the express lane. The express window control display will then display a green light directing the customer to proceed forward to their desired express window. As the customer drives their vehicle adjacent the desired express window, magnetic sensors (not shown) at the window location control the express window control display to display a red light indicating the particular express window is closed” and [Column 6, lines 57-64] “The primary computer also interfaces with the traffic control lights and traffic sensors and controls the sequence of operation of the traffic lights to maintain an ordered flow of customer traffic through the Vendor's Complex”).
Domain does not specifically teach autonomous delivery vehicles. Baalke teaches autonomous delivery vehicles that use sensors to detect and comply with traffic control elements such as traffic signals. Baalke teaches ([0009] “detecting states of lighted traffic signals, proximal the intersection” and [0079] “scan the optical data for the lighted traffic signal to determine right of way at the intersection… predict possession of right of way of the autonomous vehicle to enter the intersection”). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that a vehicle that is directed to a particular pick up station by traffic signals, as taught by Domain, could be an autonomous delivery vehicle that has sensors to detect the state of traffic signals and navigate in compliance with the traffic signals, as taught by Baalke, with predictable results.
Regarding Claim 2:
Domain in view of Baalke teaches all of the elements of Claim 1. Domain also teaches: (Original) The multi-vendor drive-through complex of claim 1, wherein at least one floor of the one or more floors is occupied by two or more vendors. ([Column 9, lines 15-16] “a variety of individual vendors of goods and services” and [Column 9, lines 47-49] “a structure having two floors, although a warehouse having three floors may be employed”).
Regarding Claim 3:
Domain in view of Baalke teaches all of the elements of Claim 1. Domain also teaches: (Original) The multi-vendor drive-through complex of claim 1, wherein the two or more vendors comprise food service providers operating separate kitchens. ([Column 2, lines 51-52] “eight or more satellite restaurants” and [Column 6, lines 37-38] “kitchen facilities”).
Regarding Claim 4:
Domain in view of Baalke teaches all of the elements of Claims 1 and 3. Domain also teaches: (Original) The multi-vendor drive-through complex of claim 3, wherein at least a second floor of the one or more floors is occupied by a pharmacy. ([Column 2, line 56] “pharmaceuticals”).
Regarding Claim 5:
Domain in view of Baalke teaches all of the elements of Claim 1. Domain also teaches: (Original) The multi-vendor drive-through complex of claim 1, wherein the one or more floors may comprise one or more horizontal transport systems for transporting the one or more goods horizontally within the one or more floors. ([Column 3, line 57] “mechanical conveyor system”).
Regarding Claim 6:
Domain in view of Baalke teaches all of the elements of Claims 1 and 5. Domain also teaches: (Original) The multi-vendor drive-through complex of claim 5, further comprising: one or more consolidation stations on at least one floor of the one or more floors, wherein the one or more consolidation stations consolidate the one or more goods into the orders. ([Column 8, lines 22-35] “Vendors' Complex employees in the compilation area then consolidate the goods of each separate order from the individual vendors delivering the goods… The Vendors' Complex goods compilation area assemble the ordered goods sent by the vendors to the compilation area, and verify that each of the goods ordered are present”).
Regarding Claim 7:
Domain in view of Baalke teaches all of the elements of Claim 1. Domain also teaches: (Original) The multi-vendor drive-through complex of claim 1, wherein the orders comprise two or more sub-orders associated with two or more vendors. Examiner is interpreting the term “sub-order” in view of Applicant’s specification at ([0110] “a single order may comprise multiple sub-orders (e.g., appetizer, dessert, different cuisines, or the like) served by multiple vendors”). Domain teaches this: ([Column 4, lines 20-23] “directed by the vehicle routing lanes to an open customer order station where they may place their order for goods or services they desire” and [Column 62-65] “a menu display positioned above each order station. Each menu lists the types of foods available and identifies the satellite restaurants that are known for the particular food items”).
Regarding Claim 10:
Domain in view of Baalke teaches all of the elements of Claim 1. Domain also teaches: (Currently Amended) The multi-vendor drive through complex of claim 1, wherein one or more orders of the orders are placed by users, and wherein the users comprise end users or one or more third party users that pick-up the orders placed by the one or more end users through user vehicles. ([Column 5, lines 10-14] “On completing a purchase transaction at the customer order station, the customer is then directed to one of the nine pick-up stations provided beneath the Vendors' Complex. The customer receives instructions from the order clerk as to which pick up station to drive to”).
Regarding Claim 13:
Domain in view of Baalke teaches all of the elements of Claim 1. Domain also teaches: (Original) The multi-vendor drive through complex of claim 1, wherein the one or more drive- through lanes comprise two or more drive-through lanes and each of the two or more drive- through lanes have two or more pick-up stations. ([Column 9, lines 23-26] “a network of vehicle routing lanes 18 extending to and through the warehouse facility and passing by the customer order stations and pick-up stations. Generally, customers using the Vendors' Complex approach the Complex along the vehicle routing lanes and are directed to one of the customer order stations where they place their order for goods and/or services provided by vendors housed in the Complex. After placing their orders, the customers are then directed to drive their vehicles along the routing lanes to one of the several order pick-up stations where they receive their ordered goods” and also see Fig 5).
Regarding Claim 14:
Domain teaches: (Currently Amended) A system for operating a multi-vendor drive-through complex, wherein the multi- vendor drive-through complex allows multiple vendors to provide goods to users, ([Column 9, lines 13-17] “a structural complex that enables consumers to purchase goods and services from a single large vendor of various goods or from a variety of individual vendors of goods and services without exiting their vehicles and entering the Complex”).
wherein the system comprises: at least one network communication interface; at least one non-transitory memory storage device having computer readable program codes stored thereon; and at least one processing device coupled to the at least one non-transitory memory storage device and the at least one network communication interface, ([Column 6, lines 57-64] “The operations of the Vendors' Complex are overseen by a primary computer that monitors the business operations and transactions and the data storage of the Complex. The primary computer also interfaces with the traffic control lights and traffic sensors and controls the sequence of operation of the traffic lights to maintain an ordered flow of customer traffic through the Vendor's Complex”).
wherein when executed the computer readable program-code is configured to cause the at least one processing device([Column 2, lines 40-46] “Customers using the Complex are directed along the routing lanes to an order station where they place orders for goods and/or services provided by the vendors housed in the Vendors' Complex”).
consolidate and process the orders at least a plurality of orders are ([Column 4, lines 20-23] “directed by the vehicle routing lanes to an open customer order station where they may place their order for goods or services they desire” and [Column 62-65] “a menu display positioned above each order station. Each menu lists the types of foods available and identifies the satellite restaurants that are known for the particular food items”).
and determine that the orders are complete and operate one or more vertical transport systems to deliver the orders with the one or more goods to the pick-up stations, ([Column 8, lines 22-35] “Vendors' Complex employees in the compilation area then consolidate the goods of each separate order from the individual vendors delivering the goods… The Vendors' Complex goods compilation area assemble the ordered goods sent by the vendors to the compilation area, and verify that each of the goods ordered are present”).
wherein the pick-up stations at least comprise one or more automated pick-up stations, Examiner notes that in their amended claims Applicant appears to have inadvertently omitted the cross-through text showing the cross-through. Domain also teaches this: [Column 19, line 68 – Column 20, line 5] “The dumbwaiter elevator will deliver the ordered goods down to the drawer 68 of the assigned pick-up station location, and the drawer will automatically extend outward to present the ordered goods to the customer waiting at the pick-up station”).
and the orders at least comprise one or more orders for one or more … vehicles; ([Column 2, lines 40-46] “Customers using the Complex are directed along the routing lanes to an order station where they place orders for goods and/or services provided by the vendors housed in the Vendors' Complex”).
communicate with one or more … vehicles in order to direct the one or more… vehicles to the one or more automated pick-up stations to receive one or more orders for the one or more… vehicles. Examiner is interpreting that the broadest reasonable interpretation of the terms “(system) communicate(s)… to direct…vehicle to… pickup station(s) to receive… order” includes a computer network that controls traffic control elements such as traffic lights and traffic signs that have the function of communicating a direction of travel to a driver of a particular vehicle to direct the driver to drive the particular vehicle to a particular pick-up station to pick up that driver’s order. This interpretation is reasonable in view of Applicant’s specification at ([0109] “Moreover, due to the traffic that may be running through the complex at times, the complex may have additional lanes and traffic control elements, which may communicate with and/or work independently from or in conjunction with traffic control elements (e.g., lights, signs, merging, or the like) in the surrounding streets (e.g., corner streets, multiple streets surrounding a portion or all of the complex, or the like). As such, the complex may control the timing of when user (e.g., user vehicles, bicycle, scooter, lanes) and/or autonomous delivery vehicles enter and/or leave the complex. For example, as users and/or autonomous delivery vehicles enter the property of the complex, the drive-through systems 203 may hold the vehicles in staging areas before the vehicles are directed to particular lanes and/or pick-up stations. (Examiner emphasis). The flow of vehicles can be sped up or slowed down in the staging areas, in the lanes, and/or in access lanes to control the flow of vehicles entering, located within, and/or leaving the property. The movement of the vehicles may be based at least in part based on information received from surrounding traffic systems (e.g., lights, cameras, sensors, or the like) to determine when traffic is clear/reduced and/or heavy/backed-up on the surrounding streets”). Examiner notes that this portion of Applicant’s disclosure does not teach nor imply that Applicant’s system electronically controls one or all autonomous vehicles within the complex, it only teaches general traffic control of all manned and unmanned vehicles using traffic lights. Examiner further notes that Applicant also recites in their specification ([00142] “the drive- through system 203, traffic control elements 1424, user computer systems 400 (e.g., GPS, other location determination devices), autonomous vehicle systems, other systems described herein, or the like, may communicate with each other in order to direct the flow of traffic through the property”). Examiner holds that Applicant’s paragraph [00142] broadly describes communication between various systems “to direct the flow of traffic through the property”. Examiner holds that “through the property” is materially different from directing a particular vehicle to a particular pick up station to pick up a particular order, as Applicant appears to imply in their claimed language. Examiner holds that the only support for the claimed in order to direct the one or more… vehicles to the one or more automated pick-up stations to receive one or more orders for the one or more… vehicles is in Applicant’s [0109] that teaches traffic control lights and signs that communicate with “users and/or autonomous delivery vehicles” to direct them “to particular lanes and/or pick-up stations”.
Domain teaches this: (see at least [Column 17, lines 36-54]) “Customers entering the vehicle routing lanes 18 of the Vendors' Complex along the right hand express lane 148 first encounter an express window control display 158 directing the customers to stop their vehicles in an express stacking area 162 until their desired express window (not shown) along the express lane 164 has opened. The express window control display 158 alternately displays a green or red light to direct customers in the stacking area 162 of the express lane to wait in the stacking area until their desired express window has opened and the vehicle last accessing the desired express window has exited the express lane. The express window control display will then display a green light directing the customer to proceed forward to their desired express window. As the customer drives their vehicle adjacent the desired express window, magnetic sensors (not shown) at the window location control the express window control display to display a red light indicating the particular express window is closed” and [Column 6, lines 57-64] “The primary computer also interfaces with the traffic control lights and traffic sensors and controls the sequence of operation of the traffic lights to maintain an ordered flow of customer traffic through the Vendor's Complex”).
Domain does not specifically teach autonomous delivery vehicles. Baalke teaches autonomous delivery vehicles that use sensors to detect and comply with traffic control elements such as traffic signals. Baalke teaches ([0009] “detecting states of lighted traffic signals, proximal the intersection” and [0079] “scan the optical data for the lighted traffic signal to determine right of way at the intersection… predict possession of right of way of the autonomous vehicle to enter the intersection”). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that a vehicle that is directed to a particular pick up station by traffic signals, as taught by Domain, could be an autonomous delivery vehicle that has sensors to detect the state of traffic signals and navigate in compliance with the traffic signals, as taught by Baalke, with predictable results.
Claims 8, 9 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent 5,158,155 (Domain) in view of U.S. Patent Publication 2018/0329418 (Baalke) in view of U.S. Patent Publication 2017/0278202 (Mimassi).
Regarding Claim 8:
Domain in view of Baalke teaches all of the elements of Claims 1 and 7. Although Domain teaches that vendors can be restaurants and orders can contain sub-orders (see above), Domain does not specifically teach: (Original) The multi-vendor drive-through complex of claim 7, wherein the two or more sub- orders are fulfilled based on preparation times for the two or more sub-orders and order backlog of the two or more vendors. Mimassi teaches this: ([0009] “the system will communicate with the food preparation management server at that venue for both known preparation times of all ordered items and any additional time offsets due to current kitchen staffing, current venue food order activity level among other known factors. A confirmation offer for the ordered food items, stating a more precise food pick-up time, if needed is then sent to the patron who either places the order or declines and looks elsewhere. A placed take-out order is pushed onto the food preparation queue with all of the correct individual item preparation time offsets to insure that all items are ready just shortly before the patron arrives to pick them up for maximal enjoyment and no waiting”). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective file date of the claimed invention to use the estimated preparation time to deliver food to the customers at the same time, as taught by Mimassi, in the drive through multiple vendor system taught by Domain, due to the predictable benefits of maximal enjoyment and no waiting, as suggested by Mimassi.
Regarding Claim 9:
Domain in view of Baalke teaches all of the elements of Claims 1 and 7. Domain in view of Baalke and Mimassi teaches all of the elements of Claim 8. Domain does not specifically teach: (Original) The multi-vendor drive through complex of claim 8, wherein the two or more sub-orders are further fulfilled based on a location of the user. Mimassi teaches this: ([0012] “receive data via a network from a plurality of client devices, the data comprising at least geolocation information and a device identifier… receiving, at the patron management server at least two endpoints comprising a current location and an intended destination and a request for venues serving specific take-out food types from the patron mobile client; calculating, employing a food preparation manager and data from a food preparation time data store, preparation times of ordered take-out food items accounting for the current situation in the preparing kitchen to increase accuracy; and coordinating food item preparation start times using the food preparation manager such that all food items come out of preparation at the same time and take-out food orders are ready very shortly prior to patron pickup arrival”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective file date of the claimed invention to use the estimated preparation time and the customer’s current location to deliver food to the customers at the same time, as taught by Mimassi, in the drive through multiple vendor system taught by Domain, due to the predictable benefits of maximal enjoyment and no waiting, as suggested by Mimassi.
Regarding Claim 15:
Domain in view of Baalke teaches: A method for facilitating order placement, consolidation, and fulfillment of multi- vendor orders via a drive-through complex, the method comprising: receiving an order ([Column 2, lines 40-46] “Customers using the Complex are directed along the routing lanes to an order station where they place orders for goods and/or services provided by the vendors housed in the Vendors' Complex”).
wherein the order comprises at least two sub-orders from at least two vendors; consolidating and processing the order received from the user; ([Column 4, lines 20-23] “directed by the vehicle routing lanes to an open customer order station where they may place their order for goods or services they desire” and [Column 62-65] “a menu display positioned above each order station. Each menu lists the types of foods available and identifies the satellite restaurants that are known for the particular food items”).
identifying a status of the at least two sub-orders; determining an available drive-through lane with an available pick-up station for the order with the at least two sub-orders;
wherein the available pick-up station is an automated pick-up station [Column 19, line 68 – Column 20, line 5] “The dumbwaiter elevator will deliver the ordered goods down to the drawer 68 of the assigned pick-up station location, and the drawer will automatically extend outward to present the ordered goods to the customer waiting at the pick-up station”).
communicating with a… vehicle to direct the… vehicle to the automated pick-up station to pick-up the order. Examiner is interpreting that the broadest reasonable interpretation of the terms “(system) communicate(s) with a… vehicle to direct the… vehicle to the automated pick-up station to pick-up the order” includes a computer network that controls traffic control elements such as traffic lights and traffic signs that have the function of communicating a direction of travel to a driver of a particular vehicle to direct the driver to drive the particular vehicle to a particular pick-up station to pick up that driver’s order. This interpretation is reasonable in view of Applicant’s specification at ([0109] “Moreover, due to the traffic that may be running through the complex at times, the complex may have additional lanes and traffic control elements, which may communicate with and/or work independently from or in conjunction with traffic control elements (e.g., lights, signs, merging, or the like) in the surrounding streets (e.g., corner streets, multiple streets surrounding a portion or all of the complex, or the like). As such, the complex may control the timing of when user (e.g., user vehicles, bicycle, scooter, lanes) and/or autonomous delivery vehicles enter and/or leave the complex. For example, as users and/or autonomous delivery vehicles enter the property of the complex, the drive-through systems 203 may hold the vehicles in staging areas before the vehicles are directed to particular lanes and/or pick-up stations. (Examiner emphasis). The flow of vehicles can be sped up or slowed down in the staging areas, in the lanes, and/or in access lanes to control the flow of vehicles entering, located within, and/or leaving the property. The movement of the vehicles may be based at least in part based on information received from surrounding traffic systems (e.g., lights, cameras, sensors, or the like) to determine when traffic is clear/reduced and/or heavy/backed-up on the surrounding streets”). Examiner notes that this portion of Applicant’s disclosure does not teach nor imply that Applicant’s system electronically controls one or all autonomous vehicles within the complex, it only teaches general traffic control of all manned and unmanned vehicles using traffic lights. Examiner further notes that Applicant also recites in their specification ([00142] “the drive- through system 203, traffic control elements 1424, user computer systems 400 (e.g., GPS, other location determination devices), autonomous vehicle systems, other systems described herein, or the like, may communicate with each other in order to direct the flow of traffic through the property”). Examiner holds that Applicant’s paragraph [00142] broadly describes communication between various systems “to direct the flow of traffic through the property”. Examiner holds that “through the property” is materially different from directing a particular vehicle to a particular pick up station to pick up a particular order, as Applicant appears to imply in their claimed language. Examiner holds that the only support for the claimed communicating with a… vehicle to direct the… vehicle to the automated pick-up station to pick-up the order is in Applicant’s [0109] that teaches traffic control lights and signs that communicate with “users and/or autonomous delivery vehicles” to direct them “to particular lanes and/or pick-up stations”.
Domain teaches this: (see at least [Column 17, lines 36-54]) “Customers entering the vehicle routing lanes 18 of the Vendors' Complex along the right hand express lane 148 first encounter an express window control display 158 directing the customers to stop their vehicles in an express stacking area 162 until their desired express window (not shown) along the express lane 164 has opened. The express window control display 158 alternately displays a green or red light to direct customers in the stacking area 162 of the express lane to wait in the stacking area until their desired express window has opened and the vehicle last accessing the desired express window has exited the express lane. The express window control display will then display a green light directing the customer to proceed forward to their desired express window. As the customer drives their vehicle adjacent the desired express window, magnetic sensors (not shown) at the window location control the express window control display to display a red light indicating the particular express window is closed” and [Column 6, lines 57-64] “The primary computer also interfaces with the traffic control lights and traffic sensors and controls the sequence of operation of the traffic lights to maintain an ordered flow of customer traffic through the Vendor's Complex”).
Domain does not specifically teach autonomous delivery vehicles. Baalke teaches autonomous delivery vehicles that use sensors to detect and comply with traffic control elements such as traffic signals. Baalke teaches ([0009] “detecting states of lighted traffic signals, proximal the intersection” and [0079] “scan the optical data for the lighted traffic signal to determine right of way at the intersection… predict possession of right of way of the autonomous vehicle to enter the intersection”). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that a vehicle that is directed to a particular pick up station by traffic signals, as taught by Domain, could be an autonomous delivery vehicle that has sensors to detect the state of traffic signals and navigate in compliance with the traffic signals, as taught by Baalke, with predictable results.
Domain does not specifically teach: identifying preparation times associated with the at least two sub-orders; transmitting the preparation times to the two or more vendors through the vendor systems; Mimassi teaches this: ([0009] “the system will communicate with the food preparation management server at that venue for both known preparation times of all ordered items and any additional time offsets due to current kitchen staffing, current venue food order activity level among other known factors. A confirmation offer for the ordered food items, stating a more precise food pick-up time, if needed is then sent to the patron who either places the order or declines and looks elsewhere. A placed take-out order is pushed onto the food preparation queue with all of the correct individual item preparation time offsets to insure that all items are ready just shortly before the patron arrives to pick them up for maximal enjoyment and no waiting”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective file date of the claimed invention to use the estimated preparation time to deliver food to the customers at the same time, as taught by Mimassi, in the drive through multiple vendor system taught by Domain, due to the predictable benefits of maximal enjoyment and no waiting, as suggested by Mimassi.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent 5,158,155 (Domain) in view of U.S. Patent Publication 2018/0329418 (Baalke) in view of U.S. Patent Publication 2022/0242669 (O’Herlihy).
Regarding Claim 11:
Domain in view of Baalke teaches all of the elements of Claim 1. While Domain also teaches pick up stations that provide the merchandise at a typical car level at ([Column 12, lines 54-61] “a delivery drawer 68 that extends outward from the pick-up station. As the drawer extends outward from the pick-up station location, it transfers the goods delivered to the pick-up station location by the dumbwaiter elevator system to a position outside the pick-up station at the proper vehicle window height where the goods are accessible to the customer from their vehicle. This enables the customer to remove the goods from the drawer without getting out of their vehicle… drawers are provided with adjustable side panels”), Domain does not specifically teach: (Currently Amended) The multi-vendor drive through complex of claim 1, wherein the pick-up stations have compartments that are adjustable to provide the orders to the autonomous vehicles or to users in user vehicles at different heights. O’Herlihy teaches a drive-through restaurant system (see at least [0004]) that provides a movable shelf ([0009] “the shuttle is provided with a movable arm whose height and reach can be automatically adjusted to reach the driver/passenger window of the vehicle”). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that cars have different window heights and, in addition to giving the customer the option of getting out of the car to reach a low compartment, as taught by Domain, the compartment could be adjustable and raised to the actual level of the car window, as taught by O’Herlihy to predictably improve customer convenience and provide an accommodation to a mobility-limited driver. Examiner notes the broadest reasonable interpretation of “or” is that the claim applies to manned vehicles.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent 5,158,155 (Domain) U.S. Patent Publication 2018/0329418 (Baalke) in view of U.S. Patent Publication 2021/0235891 (Derosa).
Regarding Claim 12:
Domain in view of Baalke teaches all of the elements of Claim 1. While Domain teaches pick up stations, Domain does not specifically teach: (Original) The multi-vendor drive through complex of claim 1, wherein at least one of the pick- up stations comprise at least a hot storage compartment and a cold storage compartment. Derosa teaches food locker apparatus that provides hot and cold food to a customer. Derosa teaches this: ([0007] “separate hot-cold lockers with integrated timed heating/cooling temperature control”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to supplement the system taught by Domain to provide a heating or cooling compartment for delivered food at the point of delivery, as taught by Derosa, to predictably improve the quality of the food.
Relevant Prior Art Not Relied Upon
The prior art is made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. The additional cited art further establishes the state of the art at the time of applicant’s application.
U.S. Patent Publication 2022/0119009 (Lee) teaches an Autonomous Vehicle that receives traffic control information electronically. See at least ([0013], [0023] and [0065]).
U.S. Patent Publication 2018/0253805 (Kelly) teaches a restaurant owned delivery drone that communicates electronically with a server and is controlled by the server to deliver food. See at least ([0230-0231]).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIMBERLY S BURSUM whose telephone number is (571)272-8213. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30 AM - 6:30 PM.
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, Florian (Ryan) m Zeender can be reached at 571-272-6790. 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.
/KIMBERLY S. BURSUM/Examiner, Art Unit 3627
/FLORIAN M ZEENDER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3627
Prosecution Insights