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 .
Status of Application
This office action is in response to the most recent filings filed by applicants on 11/05/25.
Claims 1, 9-10, and 19-21 are amended
No claims are cancelled
No claims are added
Claims 1-7 and 9-21 are pending
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-7 and 9-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Step One - First, pursuant to step 1 in the January 2019 Guidance on 84 Fed. Reg. 53, the claims 1-7 and 11-18 is/are directed to a method which is a statutory category.
Step One - First, pursuant to step 1 in the January 2019 Guidance on 84 Fed. Reg. 53, the claims 9 and 19-20 is/are directed to a system which is a statutory category.
Step One - First, pursuant to step 1 in the January 2019 Guidance on 84 Fed. Reg. 53, the claims 10 and 21 is/are directed to a device/apparatus which is a statutory category.
Under the 2019 PEG, Step 2A under which a claim is not “directed to” a judicial exception unless the claim satisfies a two-prong inquiry. Further, particular groupings of abstract ideas are consistent with judicial precedent and are based on an extraction and synthesis of the key concepts identified by the courts as being abstract.
With respect to the Step 2A, Prong One, the claims as drafted, and given their broadest reasonable interpretation, fall within the Abstract idea grouping of “certain methods of organizing human activity” (business relations; relationships or interactions between people). For instance, independent Claim 1 is directed to an abstract idea, as evidenced by claim limitations “receiving mailing information related to a target article and filled by a target user in advance, wherein the mailing information comprises: article mailing address information, article property information, and article mailing service information; according to logistics property information of logistics products, screening out at least one logistics product that matches the article property information and the article mailing service information from the logistics products, so as to obtain a logistics product set after the first screening; screening out the logistics products with collection station information and delivery station information from the logistics product set after the first screening, so as to obtain a logistics product set after the second screening, wherein the collection station information is station name information for collecting an article to be mailed, the delivery station information is station name information for delivering the article to be mailed, and the collection station information and the delivery station information are station information associated with the article mailing address information; and according to the logistics product set after the second screening, determining a target logistics product for mailing the target article, wherein the determining the target logistics product for mailing the target article according to the logistics product set after the second screening comprises: determining priority levels of the logistics products; determining, according to the priority levels of the logistics products, a priority level of each logistics product in the logistics product set after the second screening; and determining a logistics product with the highest priority level in the logistics product set after the second screening as the target logistics product.”
In the originally submitted specification the above claims are described [0021] In a related method for determining a logistics product, for example, a user chooses which logistics product to use and then fills in relevant information of an article to be mailed, there are often a technical problem below: a logistics product suitable for the user cannot be effectively recommended for the user, so that poor user experience is caused. In addition, unsuitable logistics products may have the problems of being high in time consumption and unable to deliver according to scheduled time. Therefore, low mailing efficiency is caused. [0022] In order to solve the problems described above, some examples of the present disclosure propose a method and apparatus for determining a logistics product, so that the target logistics product for mailing the target article may be quickly and efficiently determined.
These claim limitations belong to the grouping of “certain methods of organizing human activity” because the claims are related to managing the logistics product for mailing the target article for one or more human entities involves organizing human activity based on the description of “certain methods of organizing human activity” provided by the courts. The court have used the phrase “Certain methods of organizing human activity” as —fundamental economic principles or practices (including hedging, insurance, mitigating risk); commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations); managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions).
Independent Claims 9-10, 19-20 and 21 is/are recite substantially similar limitations to independent claim 1 and is/are rejected under 2A for similar reasons to claim 1 above.
With respect to the Step 2A, Prong Two - This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites additional elements: “A method for determining a logistics product, the method being applied to a logistics product determining device comprising a memory configured to store computer executable instructions and a processor configured to execute the computer executable instructions to implement the method, and the method comprising: A non-volatile computer-readable medium, in which a computer program is stored, wherein a method for determining a logistics product is implemented when the program is executed by a processor, the method for determining a logistics product, comprising: An electronic device, comprising: at least one processors; and a storage apparatus, configured to store at least one programs, wherein the at least one programs, when executed by the at least one processors, enable the at least one processors to implement the method according to claim 2. An electronic device, comprising: at least one processors; and a storage apparatus, configured to store at least one programs, wherein the at least one programs, when executed by the at least one processors, enable the at least one processors to implement the method according to claim 3. A non-volatile computer-readable medium, storing a computer program thereon, wherein the method according to claim 2 is implemented when the program is executed by a processor” at a high level of generality such that it amounts to no more than: Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, as discussed in MPEP 2106.05(f).
Thus, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limitations on practicing the abstract idea. As a result, claims 1, 9-10, 19-20 and 21 do not provide any specifics regarding the integration into a practical application when recited in a claim with a judicial exception. See MPEP 2106.05(f).
Similarly dependent claims 2-7 and 11-18 are also directed to an abstract idea under 2A, first and second prong. In the present application, all of the dependent claims have been evaluated and it was found that they all inherit the deficiencies set forth with respect to the independent claims. For instance, dependent claims 2 recite “wherein the according to the logistics product set after the second screening, determining a target logistics product for mailing the target article comprises: screening out the logistics products which are already available in a target store from the logistics product set after the second screening, so as to obtain a logistics product set after the third screening, wherein the target store is a store for mailing the target article; and according to the logistics product set after the third screening, determining the target logistics product for mailing the target article” and dependent claims 3 recite “further comprising: in response to the determination for that the target logistics product does not exist in the logistics product set after the third screening, screening out logistics products with routes to reach the collection station information and the delivery station information from the logistics product set after the third screening, so as to obtain a logistics product set after the fifth screening; in response to the determination for that the target store sets priority levels for the logistics product set after the fifth screening, obtaining the priority level of each logistics product in the logistics product set after the fifth screening; and determining the logistics product with the priority level which meets the target condition in the logistics product set after the fifth screening as the target logistics product.”. Here, these claims offer further descriptive limitations of elements found in the independent claims which are similar to the abstract idea noted in the independent claim above.
With respect to Step 2B, the claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. First, the invention lacks improvements to another technology or technical field [see Alice at 2351; 2019 IEG at 55], and lacks meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment [Alice at 2360, 2019 IEG at 55], and fails to effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing [2019 IEG, 55]. For the reasons articulated above, the claims recite an abstract idea that is limited to a particular field of endeavor (MPEP § 2106.05(h)) and recites insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP § 2106.05(g)). By the factors and rationale provided above with respect to these MPEP sections, the additional elements of the claims that fail to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application also fail to amount to “significantly more” than the abstract idea.
As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element(s) of “A method for determining a logistics product, the method being applied to a logistics product determining device comprising a memory configured to store computer executable instructions and a processor configured to execute the computer executable instructions to implement the method, and the method comprising: A non-volatile computer-readable medium, in which a computer program is stored, wherein a method for determining a logistics product is implemented when the program is executed by a processor, the method for determining a logistics product, comprising: An electronic device, comprising: at least one processors; and a storage apparatus, configured to store at least one programs, wherein the at least one programs, when executed by the at least one processors, enable the at least one processors to implement the method according to claim 2. An electronic device, comprising: at least one processors; and a storage apparatus, configured to store at least one programs, wherein the at least one programs, when executed by the at least one processors, enable the at least one processors to implement the method according to claim 3. A non-volatile computer-readable medium, storing a computer program thereon, wherein the method according to claim 2 is implemented when the program is executed by a processor” are insufficient to amount to significantly more. Applicants originally submitted specification describes the computer components above at least in page/ paragraph [0080]-[0088]. In light of the specification, it should be noted that the components discussed above did not meaningfully limit the abstract idea because they merely linked the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment (i.e., "implementation via computers"). In light of the specification, it should be noted that the claim limitations discussed above are merely instructions to implement the abstract idea on a computer. See MPEP 2106.05(f). (See MPEP 2106.05(f) - Mere Instructions to Apply an Exception - “Thus, for example, claims that amount to nothing more than an instruction to apply the abstract idea using a generic computer do not render an abstract idea eligible.” Alice Corp., 134 S. Ct. at 235). Mere instructions to apply an exception using computer component cannot provide an inventive concept.). The additional elements amount to no more than a recitation of generic computer elements utilized to perform generic computer functions, such as performing repetitive calculations, Bancorp Services v. Sun Life, 687 F.3d 1266, 1278, 103 USPQ2d 1425, 1433 (Fed. Cir. 2012) ("The computer required by some of Bancorp’s claims is employed only for its most basic function, the performance of repetitive calculations, and as such does not impose meaningful limits on the scope of those claims."); and storing and retrieving information in memory, Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015); OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1363, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93; see MPEP 2106.05(d)(II).
The claim fails to recite any improvements to another technology or technical field, improvements to the functioning of the computer itself, use of a particular machine, effecting a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, adding unconventional steps that confine the claim to a particular useful application, and/or meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of an abstract idea to a particular environment. See 84 Fed. Reg. 55. Viewed individually or as a whole, these additional claim element(s) do not provide meaningful limitation(s) to transform the abstract idea into a patent eligible application of the abstract idea such that the claim(s) amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
Independent Claims 9-10, 19-20 and 21 is/are recite substantially similar limitations to independent claim 1 and is/are rejected under 2B for similar reasons to claim 1 above.
Further, it should be noted that additional elements of the claimed invention such as claim limitations when considered individually or as an ordered combination along with the other limitations discussed above in method claim 1 also do not meaningfully limit the abstract idea because they merely linked the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment (i.e., "implementation via computers"). In light of the specification, it should be noted that the claim limitations discussed above are merely instructions to implement the abstract idea on a computer. See MPEP 2106.
Similarly, dependent claims 2-7 and 11-18 also do not include limitations amounting to significantly more than the abstract idea under the second prong or 2B of the Alice framework. In the present application, all of the dependent claims have been evaluated and it was found that they all inherit the deficiencies set forth with respect to the independent claims. Further, it should be noted that the dependent claims do not include limitations that overcome the stated assertions. Here, the dependent claims recite features/limitations that include computer components identified above in part 2B of analysis of independent claims 1, 9-10, 19-20 and 21. As a result, Examiner asserts that dependent claims, such as dependent claims 2-7 and 11-18 are also directed to the abstract idea identified above.
For more information on 101 rejections, see MPEP 2106, January 2019 Guidance at https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-01 -07/pdf/2018-28282.pdf
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.
Claim(s) 1-7 and 9-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US 20040267675 A1) Burton et al., and further in view of (US 7979359 B1) Young et al.
As per claims 1, 9 and 10: Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Burton shows:
A method for determining a logistics product, the method being applied to a logistics product determining device comprising a memory configured to store computer executable instructions and a processor configured to execute the computer executable instructions to implement the method, and the method comprising (Reference Burton: [0037], [0045]-[0050]: [0045]: Many different methods will be readily apparent for determining how to assemble groups of items within the desired postal rate. For example, a sub-order of items may simply be selected in order from a list until the maximum characteristic, i.e. weight, is reached, then a new sub-order started. Other more complex methods may be used to group items by the appropriate characteristic. Still other more complex methods may be used to group items both by a first characteristic relevant to postal rates and a second characteristic not relevant to postal rates but otherwise relevant to fulfilling the customer order, for example a second characteristic based on grouping similar types of items.);
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Burton shows:
An electronic device, comprising (Reference Burton: [0029]-[0035]): input/output device, electro-mechanical device:
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Burton shows:
at least one processor (Reference Burton: claim 10: A system for selecting and packaging items for mailing, comprising: a processor; a memory connected to the processor, the memory storing data and instructions for controlling the operation of the processor; the processor operative to perform the steps of receiving a customer order specifying a plurality of items for shipping by mail); and
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Burton in view of Young shows:
“a storage apparatus, configured to store at least one programs, wherein the at least one programs, when executed by the at least one processors, enable the at least one processors to implement a method for determining a logistics product, comprising:
A non-transitory computer-readable medium, in which a computer program is stored, wherein a method for determining a logistics product applied to a logistics product determining device is implemented when the program is executed by a processor, the method for determining a logistics product, comprising:”
Although Reference Burton discloses computer and computer program products ([0029]-[0035], [0037], [0045]-[0050]: [0045]), Reference Burton does not explicitly show computer readable medium as is discussed in the claim limitations above. Reference Young shows “computer readable medium” and as such the limitations discussed above at least in col. 2, lines 31-63: Various embodiments of a system and method for selectively applying an item sortation process are described. The system and method for selectively applying an item sortation process may include a shipping consolidation analyzer, which may in various embodiments be implemented as a component of a packing information system. A packaging information system may include various components used to facilitate efficient and/or cost-effective operations in a materials handling facility. For example, in some embodiments, a packaging information system may include a shipping consolidation analyzer configured to facilitate packing and shipping operations by determining if and how a given group of items should be consolidated into one or more shipments. The shipping consolidation analyzer described herein may be implemented in one or more software modules executing on one or more nodes of a computing system (e.g., as program instructions and data structures configured to implement functionality described), or in any combination of hardware and software components suitable for implementing the functionality described. For example, the shipping consolidation analyzer may in some embodiments be implemented as program instructions encoded on a computer-readable storage medium for execution by a computing system. For illustrative purposes, some embodiments of a shipping consolidation analyzer are described below in which particular item and container parameters are analyzed in particular manners, and in which particular types of analyses and processing of parameters are performed. However, those skilled in the art will appreciate that the techniques described may be used in a wide variety of other situations, and that embodiments of these techniques are not limited to the details of these examples. Col. 5, lines 56-63: Note that, as used herein, "item groups" may refer to items grouped for shipping to a customer or items grouped for any other operation within a materials handling facility, such as for storing in inventory or transporting to a packing or shipping station. In various embodiments, "containers" may include pallets, crates, cases, bins, boxes, carts, totes, conveyor belts, shelves, cabinets, or any other apparatus capable of storing, conveying or shipping one or more items.
Reference Burton and Reference Young are analogous prior art to the claimed invention because the references generally relate to field of optimizing package mailing (Burton [0009]-[0011], Young col. 6, lines 46-67). Further, said references are part of the same classification, i.e., G06Q10. Lastly, said references are filed before the effective filing date of the instant application; hence, said references are analogous prior-art references.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this application for AIA to provide the teachings of Reference Young, particularly the computer readable medium (Young: col. 2, lines 31-63, Col. 5, lines 56-63), in the disclosure of Reference Burton, particularly in the computer and computer program products ([0029]-[0035], [0037], [0045]-[0050]: [0045]), in order to provide for a computer system that includes a computer readable medium as taught by Reference Young (see at least in col. 2, lines 31-63, Col. 5, lines 56-63), where upon the execution of the method and system of Reference Young for selectively applying an item sortation process may include a shipping consolidation analyzer, which may in various embodiments be implemented as a component of a packing information system. A packaging information system may include various components used to facilitate efficient and/or cost-effective operations in a materials handling facility (Young: col. 2, lines 33-41) so that the process of optimizing package mailing can be made more efficient and effective.
Further, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements in a similar optimizing package mailing field of endeavor, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that, given the existing technical ability to combine the elements as evidenced by Reference Burton in view of Reference Young, the results of the combination were predictable (MPEP 2143 A);
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Burton in view of Young shows:
receiving mailing information related to a target article and filled by a target user in advance, wherein the mailing information comprises:
article mailing address information, article property information, and article mailing service information (Reference Burton shows [0031] With reference now to FIG. 4, a customer order data table 42 contained in database 36 is seen to include data relating to customer orders. Each customer order entry, that is each row of data, is seen to include an order identifier, customer information such as name, address and other related information, order information including the items and quantities of items ordered and order fulfillment information including the number of mailings and items in each mailing in the manner described below. [0038]: the front and back of mailer 48 (FIG. 6) is shown before the mailer is packaged for shipping. As shown, the front includes appropriate postage, a customer address and a notice to the customer, for example that the customer order has been shipped in multiple shipments. The back contains a bar code as further described below. [0039]: a first mailer 58A and an N.sup.th mailer 58N, the mailers together comprising a single customer order packaged as a plurality of sub-orders in the manner described below. The front of each mailer includes the information described in FIG. 7 above. The barcode on the back of each mailer is covered by stacked items as described below. Each mailer is shrink-wrapped in plastic for mailing in a selected national postage system or with a private mailing service.);
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Burton in view of Young shows:
according to logistics property information of logistics products, screening out at least one logistics product that matches the article property information and the article mailing service information from the logistics products, so as to obtain a logistics product set after the first screening (Reference Burton [0037] It will be understood that the invention is not limited to CDs and/or DVDs and the mechanisms for packaging same, but to any items which can be processed in accordance with the methods described herein below. Exemplary items in addition to those described include: brochures, books, card packs, clothing items and any other item wherein groups of the same item have similar characteristics such as size or weight and are capable of automated handling in the described manner. [0045] If a single package can be assembled and mailed at the desired postal rate (step 98), then those steps are performed (step 100, returning to step 106 of FIG. 12). If a single package cannot be assembled and mailed at the desired postal rate (step 98), then the number of packages including the exact item contents of each package is determined (step 102), and the package is assembled and mailed (step 104, returning to step 106 of FIG. 12). Many different methods will be readily apparent for determining how to assemble groups of items within the desired postal rate. For example, a sub-order of items may simply be selected in order from a list until the maximum characteristic, i.e. weight, is reached, then a new sub-order started. Other more complex methods may be used to group items by the appropriate characteristic. Still other more complex methods may be used to group items both by a first characteristic relevant to postal rates and a second characteristic not relevant to postal rates but otherwise relevant to fulfilling the customer order, for example a second characteristic based on grouping similar types of items);
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Burton in view of Young shows:
“screening out the logistics products with collection station information and delivery station information from the logistics product set after the first screening, so as to obtain a logistics product set after the second screening, wherein the collection station information is station name information for collecting an article to be mailed, the delivery station information is station name information for delivering the article to be mailed, and the collection station information and the delivery station information are station information associated with the article mailing address information; and
according to the logistics product set after the second screening, determining a target logistics product for mailing the target article”
Reference Burton “screening out the …. products with collection station information and delivery station information from the logistics product set after the first screening, so as to obtain a product set after the second screening, wherein the collection station information and the delivery station information are station information associated with the article mailing address information; according to the … product set after the second screening, ….” (Burton: [0037] It will be understood that the invention is not limited to CDs and/or DVDs and the mechanisms for packaging same, but to any items which can be processed in accordance with the methods described herein below. Exemplary items in addition to those described include: brochures, books, card packs, clothing items and any other item wherein groups of the same item have similar characteristics such as size or weight and are capable of automated handling in the described manner. [0044] Continuing with reference to FIG. 13, subsequently, the list of ordered items is retrieved from the customer order data and the pertinent mail characteristics for each ordered item are retrieved from table 43 (step 94). The pertinent postal data is retrieved from table 40, and the total items in the customer order are considered to determine if a single package would exceed the desired postal rates (step 96). For example, assuming that CDs and DVDs are being mailed, it is likely that the determining characteristic for postage would be weight. Thus, the weight of each ordered item is retrieved and the total weight calculated to see if it exceeds the maximum weight for the desired postal class and rate. For items where thickness or other size measurements or other characteristics are determinative of postal rates, the determinative characteristic(s) would be retrieved for each item and totaled. [0045] If a single package can be assembled and mailed at the desired postal rate (step 98), then those steps are performed (step 100, returning to step 106 of FIG. 12). If a single package cannot be assembled and mailed at the desired postal rate (step 98), then the number of packages including the exact item contents of each package is determined (step 102), and the package is assembled and mailed (step 104, returning to step 106 of FIG. 12). Many different methods will be readily apparent for determining how to assemble groups of items within the desired postal rate. For example, a sub-order of items may simply be selected in order from a list until the maximum characteristic, i.e. weight, is reached, then a new sub-order started. Other more complex methods may be used to group items by the appropriate characteristic. Still other more complex methods may be used to group items both by a first characteristic relevant to postal rates and a second characteristic not relevant to postal rates but otherwise relevant to fulfilling the customer order, for example a second characteristic based on grouping similar types of items.
Reference Burton does not explicitly show “logistics” and “determining a target logistics product for mailing the target article” as is discussed in the claim limitations above. Reference Young shows “logistics” and “determining a target logistics product for mailing the target article” ((col. 11, lines 50-66: 39) As illustrated in FIG. 5, a packaging information system may in some embodiments include an upstream fulfillment planning engine 510, configured to determine the facility or facilities to which an item group or complete customer order should be directed. As described above, a fulfillment planning engine 510 may in some embodiments be configured to determine whether or not a single fulfillment facility is able to provide all of the items in an order, and may pass subsets of a customer order to the smallest number of fulfillment facilities that may supply the required items. In other embodiments, fulfillment planning engine 510 may be configured to divide a customer order into multiple item groups dependent on other parameters, including, but not limited to, a service level agreement, the location of one or more facilities with respect to a destination, customer and/or order priorities (e.g., premium customer service or premium shipping considerations), specialty transportation service availability, or specialty services capability (e.g., gift wrapping or export services). Col. 12, lines 1-20: Fulfillment planning engine 510 may provide item data 515 for one or more items of one or more customer orders to be fulfilled, to one or more shipping consolidation analyzers 520 (e.g., to a shipping consolidation analyzer 520 in each of two or more target facility or to one or more centrally located shipping consolidation analyzers 520 on behalf of one or more target facilities). For instance, fulfillment planning engine 510 may be integrated with an e-commerce portal configured to receive customer orders for one or more items; the fulfillment planning engine may provide indications of such items to one or more shipping consolidation analyzers for fulfillment. In some embodiments, shipping consolidation analyzer 520 may provide feedback to fulfillment planning engine 510 (e.g., feedback indicating the results of shipment consolidation analysis, the configuration of a target facility, the capabilities and available services of a target facility, the available containers of a target facility, etc.). In the example illustrated in FIG. 5, fulfillment planning engine 510 may also provide item group data 515 to data store 500 for storage and/or future analysis (not shown). Col. 13, lines 34-57: For example, a user may request one or more reports regarding the number or percentage of item groups consolidated, the number or average number of items in each shipment set, the number or percentage of item groups requiring exception handling for shipment consolidation, the number or percentage of item groups shipped as whole or partial palettes, or the performance of the overall packaging operation in terms of speed, rework, or meeting transportation schedules. In some embodiments, trends of each of these metrics may be reported and/or analyzed in order to identify opportunities to improve the shipment consolidation method and/or the configuration of a given materials handling facility. For example, if one of these metrics changes by a given percentage (up or down), the shipment consolidation analyzer may be configured to flag the change and/or to trigger a review of the performance of the packaging information system or the operation of a given facility. Col. 13, lines 58-67, col. 14, lines 1-10: While the embodiment illustrated by FIG. 5 includes a fulfillment planning engine 510, a shipment consolidation analyzer 520, and a container recommender 540 that are separate components of a system configured to manage packing/shipping operations in a materials handling facility on behalf of an order fulfillment operation, in other embodiments, the functionality described as being performed by each of these components may all be performed by sub-components of a single system component, or may be partitioned in other ways. For example, in one embodiment, container recommender 540 may be implemented as a module of a software application configured to implement shipment consolidation analyzer 520. In another example, data store 500 may be located in a memory of the same computing node or of a different computing node than a memory that includes program instructions configured to implement a packaging information system, fulfillment planning engine 510, shipment consolidation analyzer 520 and/or container recommended 540. Col. 15, lines 14-24: A shipping consolidation analyzer may be further described using the following example. In this example, an e-commerce organization sells items of various types that can be shipped to customers, and a customer may place an order for an arbitrary quantity of each of any number of different items. A customer order may be provided to a materials handling facility intact (e.g., containing all of the items in a given customer order) or may be divided into two or more item groups by a fulfillment planning engine, as described herein. FIGS. 6A-6C illustrate various groupings of items in one such item group, according to one embodiment.
Reference Burton and Reference Young are analogous prior art to the claimed invention because the references generally relate to field of optimizing package mailing (Burton [0009]-[0011], Young col. 6, lines 46-67). Further, said references are part of the same classification, i.e., G06Q10. Lastly, said references are filed before the effective filing date of the instant application; hence, said references are analogous prior-art references.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this application for AIA to provide the teachings of Reference Young, particularly the computer readable medium (Young: col. 2, lines 31-63, Col. 5, lines 56-63), in the disclosure of Reference Burton, particularly in the computer and computer program products ([0029]-[0035], [0037], [0045]-[0050]: [0045]), in order to provide for a computer system that includes a computer readable medium as taught by Reference Young (see at least in col. 2, lines 31-63, Col. 5, lines 56-63), where upon the execution of the method and system of Reference Young for selectively applying an item sortation process may include a shipping consolidation analyzer, which may in various embodiments be implemented as a component of a packing information system. A packaging information system may include various components used to facilitate efficient and/or cost-effective operations in a materials handling facility (Young: col. 2, lines 33-41) so that the process of optimizing package mailing can be made more efficient and effective.
Further, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements in a similar optimizing package mailing field of endeavor, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that, given the existing technical ability to combine the elements as evidenced by Reference Burton in view of Reference Young, the results of the combination were predictable (MPEP 2143 A);
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Burton in view of Young shows:
“wherein the determining the target logistics product for mailing the target article according to the logistics product set after the second screening comprises:
determining priority levels of the logistics products;
determining, according to the priority levels of the logistics products, a priority level of each logistics product in the logistics product set after the second screening; and
determining a logistics product with the highest priority level in the logistics product set after the second screening as the target logistics product”
Reference Burton: [0037] It will be understood that the invention is not limited to CDs and/or DVDs and the mechanisms for packaging same, but to any items which can be processed in accordance with the methods described herein below. Exemplary items in addition to those described include: brochures, books, card packs, clothing items and any other item wherein groups of the same item have similar characteristics such as size or weight and are capable of automated handling in the described manner. [0044] Continuing with reference to FIG. 13, subsequently, the list of ordered items is retrieved from the customer order data and the pertinent mail characteristics for each ordered item are retrieved from table 43 (step 94). The pertinent postal data is retrieved from table 40, and the total items in the customer order are considered to determine if a single package would exceed the desired postal rates (step 96). For example, assuming that CDs and DVDs are being mailed, it is likely that the determining characteristic for postage would be weight. Thus, the weight of each ordered item is retrieved and the total weight calculated to see if it exceeds the maximum weight for the desired postal class and rate. For items where thickness or other size measurements or other characteristics are determinative of postal rates, the determinative characteristic(s) would be retrieved for each item and totaled. [0045] If a single package can be assembled and mailed at the desired postal rate (step 98), then those steps are performed (step 100, returning to step 106 of FIG. 12). If a single package cannot be assembled and mailed at the desired postal rate (step 98), then the number of packages including the exact item contents of each package is determined (step 102), and the package is assembled and mailed (step 104, returning to step 106 of FIG. 12). Many different methods will be readily apparent for determining how to assemble groups of items within the desired postal rate. For example, a sub-order of items may simply be selected in order from a list until the maximum characteristic, i.e. weight, is reached, then a new sub-order started. Other more complex methods may be used to group items by the appropriate characteristic. Still other more complex methods may be used to group items both by a first characteristic relevant to postal rates and a second characteristic not relevant to postal rates but otherwise relevant to fulfilling the customer order, for example a second characteristic based on grouping similar types of items.
Reference Burton shows in col. 11, lines 30-67: a shipping consolidation analyzer may be a component of an overall packaging information system for a materials handling facility. FIG. 5 illustrates a data flow diagram for a packaging information system that includes a shipping consolidation analyzer, according to one embodiment. The packaging information system may include various hardware and/or software components configured to carry out the operations described herein as part of shipment consolidation analysis or shipping container recommendation. In this example, data store 500 may be a data store containing item parameter values (e.g., item dimension and weight values) for all of the items handled within a materials handling facility and may also contain container parameter values (e.g., container dimensions, weight, and/or capacity information for each type of container used within the facility). Data store 500 may be a data store located within the materials handling facility itself and accessed by the various operations of the facility or may be a remote data store accessed by various operation of the facility via a network over which they are connected…. As illustrated in FIG. 5, a packaging information system may in some embodiments include an upstream fulfillment planning engine 510, configured to determine the facility or facilities to which an item group or complete customer order should be directed. As described above, a fulfillment planning engine 510 may in some embodiments be configured to determine whether or not a single fulfillment facility is able to provide all of the items in an order, and may pass subsets of a customer order to the smallest number of fulfillment facilities that may supply the required items. In other embodiments, fulfillment planning engine 510 may be configured to divide a customer order into multiple item groups dependent on other parameters, including, but not limited to, a service level agreement, the location of one or more facilities with respect to a destination, customer and/or order priorities (e.g., premium customer service or premium shipping considerations), specialty transportation service availability, or specialty services capability (e.g., gift wrapping or export services).
Reference Burton does not explicitly show “logistics” and “determining a target logistics product for mailing the target article” as is discussed in the claim limitations above. Reference Young shows “logistics” and “determining a target logistics product for mailing the target article” ((col. 11, lines 50-66: 39) As illustrated in FIG. 5, a packaging information system may in some embodiments include an upstream fulfillment planning engine 510, configured to determine the facility or facilities to which an item group or complete customer order should be directed. As described above, a fulfillment planning engine 510 may in some embodiments be configured to determine whether or not a single fulfillment facility is able to provide all of the items in an order, and may pass subsets of a customer order to the smallest number of fulfillment facilities that may supply the required items. In other embodiments, fulfillment planning engine 510 may be configured to divide a customer order into multiple item groups dependent on other parameters, including, but not limited to, a service level agreement, the location of one or more facilities with respect to a destination, customer and/or order priorities (e.g., premium customer service or premium shipping considerations), specialty transportation service availability, or specialty services capability (e.g., gift wrapping or export services). Col. 12, lines 1-20: Fulfillment planning engine 510 may provide item data 515 for one or more items of one or more customer orders to be fulfilled, to one or more shipping consolidation analyzers 520 (e.g., to a shipping consolidation analyzer 520 in each of two or more target facility or to one or more centrally located shipping consolidation analyzers 520 on behalf of one or more target facilities). For instance, fulfillment planning engine 510 may be integrated with an e-commerce portal configured to receive customer orders for one or more items; the fulfillment planning engine may provide indications of such items to one or more shipping consolidation analyzers for fulfillment. In some embodiments, shipping consolidation analyzer 520 may provide feedback to fulfillment planning engine 510 (e.g., feedback indicating the results of shipment consolidation analysis, the configuration of a target facility, the capabilities and available services of a target facility, the available containers of a target facility, etc.). In the example illustrated in FIG. 5, fulfillment planning engine 510 may also provide item group data 515 to data store 500 for storage and/or future analysis (not shown). Col. 13, lines 34-57: For example, a user may request one or more reports regarding the number or percentage of item groups consolidated, the number or average number of items in each shipment set, the number or percentage of item groups requiring exception handling for shipment consolidation, the number or percentage of item groups shipped as whole or partial palettes, or the performance of the overall packaging operation in terms of speed, rework, or meeting transportation schedules. In some embodiments, trends of each of these metrics may be reported and/or analyzed in order to identify opportunities to improve the shipment consolidation method and/or the configuration of a given materials handling facility. For example, if one of these metrics changes by a given percentage (up or down), the shipment consolidation analyzer may be configured to flag the change and/or to trigger a review of the performance of the packaging information system or the operation of a given facility. Col. 13, lines 58-67, col. 14, lines 1-10: While the embodiment illustrated by FIG. 5 includes a fulfillment planning engine 510, a shipment consolidation analyzer 520, and a container recommender 540 that are separate components of a system configured to manage packing/shipping operations in a materials handling facility on behalf of an order fulfillment operation, in other embodiments, the functionality described as being performed by each of these components may all be performed by sub-components of a single system component, or may be partitioned in other ways. For example, in one embodiment, container recommender 540 may be implemented as a module of a software application configured to implement shipment consolidation analyzer 520. In another example, data store 500 may be located in a memory of the same computing node or of a different computing node than a memory that includes program instructions configured to implement a packaging information system, fulfillment planning engine 510, shipment consolidation analyzer 520 and/or container recommended 540. Col. 15, lines 14-24: A shipping consolidation analyzer may be further described using the following example. In this example, an e-commerce organization sells items of various types that can be shipped to customers, and a customer may place an order for an arbitrary quantity of each of any number of different items. A customer order may be provided to a materials handling facility intact (e.g., containing all of the items in a given customer order) or may be divided into two or more item groups by a fulfillment planning engine, as described herein. FIGS. 6A-6C illustrate various groupings of items in one such item group, according to one embodiment.
Reference Burton and Reference Young are analogous prior art to the claimed invention because the references generally relate to field of optimizing package mailing (Burton [0009]-[0011], Young col. 6, lines 46-67). Further, said references are part of the same classification, i.e., G06Q10. Lastly, said references are filed before the effective filing date of the instant application; hence, said references are analogous prior-art references.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this application for AIA to provide the teachings of Reference Young, particularly the computer readable medium (Young: col. 2, lines 31-63, Col. 5, lines 56-63), in the disclosure of Reference Burton, particularly in the computer and computer program products ([0029]-[0035], [0037], [0045]-[0050]: [0045]), in order to provide for a computer system that includes a computer readable medium as taught by Reference Young (see at least in col. 2, lines 31-63, Col. 5, lines 56-63), where upon the execution of the method and system of Reference Young for selectively applying an item sortation process may include a shipping consolidation analyzer, which may in various embodiments be implemented as a component of a packing information system. A packaging information system may include various components used to facilitate efficient and/or cost-effective operations in a materials handling facility (Young: col. 2, lines 33-41) so that the process of optimizing package mailing can be made more efficient and effective.
Further, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements in a similar optimizing package mailing field of endeavor, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that, given the existing technical ability to combine the elements as evidenced by Reference Burton in view of Reference Young, the results of the combination were predictable (MPEP 2143 A).
As per claims 2, 19 and 21: Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Burton in view of Young shows:
“The method of claim 1:
An electronic device, comprising: at least one processors; and
a storage apparatus, configured to store at least one programs, wherein the at least one programs, when executed by the at least one processors, enable the at least one processors to implement the method according to claim 2.
a non-volatile computer-readable medium, storing a computer program thereon, wherein the method according to claim 2 is implemented when the program is executed by a processor
wherein the according to the logistics product set after the second screening, determining a target logistics product for mailing the target article comprises:”
Although Reference Burton discloses computer and computer program products ([0029]-[0035], [0037], [0045]-[0050]: [0045]), Reference Burton does not explicitly show computer readable medium as is discussed in the claim limitations above. Reference Young shows “computer readable medium” and as such the limitations discussed above at least in col. 2, lines 31-63: Various embodiments of a system and method for selectively applying an item sortation process are described. The system and method for selectively applying an item sortation process may include a shipping consolidation analyzer, which may in various embodiments be implemented as a component of a packing information system. A packaging information system may include various components used to facilitate efficient and/or cost-effective operations in a materials handling facility. For example, in some embodiments, a packaging information system may include a shipping consolidation analyzer configured to facilitate packing and shipping operations by determining if and how a given group of items should be consolidated into one or more shipments. The shipping consolidation analyzer described herein may be implemented in one or more software modules executing on one or more nodes of a computing system (e.g., as program instructions and data structures configured to implement functionality described), or in any combination of hardware and software components suitable for implementing the functionality described. For example, the shipping consolidation analyzer may in some embodiments be implemented as program instructions encoded on a computer-readable storage medium for execution by a computing system. For illustrative purposes, some embodiments of a shipping consolidation analyzer are described below in which particular item and container parameters are analyzed in particular manners, and in which particular types of analyses and processing of parameters are performed. However, those skilled in the art will appreciate that the techniques described may be used in a wide variety of other situations, and that embodiments of these techniques are not limited to the details of these examples. Col. 5, lines 56-63: Note that, as used herein, "item groups" may refer to items grouped for shipping to a customer or items grouped for any other operation within a materials handling facility, such as for storing in inventory or transporting to a packing or shipping station. In various embodiments, "containers" may include pallets, crates, cases, bins, boxes, carts, totes, conveyor belts, shelves, cabinets, or any other apparatus capable of storing, conveying or shipping one or more items.
Reference Burton and Reference Young are analogous prior art to the claimed invention because the references generally relate to field of optimizing package mailing (Burton [0009]-[0011], Young col. 6, lines 46-67). Further, said references are part of the same classification, i.e., G06Q10. Lastly, said references are filed before the effective filing date of the instant application; hence, said references are analogous prior-art references.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this application for AIA to provide the teachings of Reference Young, particularly the computer readable medium (Young: col. 2, lines 31-63, Col. 5, lines 56-63), in the disclosure of Reference Burton, particularly in the computer and computer program products ([0029]-[0035], [0037], [0045]-[0050]: [0045]), in order to provide for a computer system that includes a computer readable medium as taught by Reference Young (see at least in col. 2, lines 31-63, Col. 5, lines 56-63), where upon the execution of the method and system of Reference Young for selectively applying an item sortation process may include a shipping consolidation analyzer, which may in various embodiments be implemented as a component of a packing information system. A packaging information system may include various components used to facilitate efficient and/or cost-effective operations in a materials handling facility (Young: col. 2, lines 33-41) so that the process of optimizing package mailing can be made more efficient and effective.
Further, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements in a similar optimizing package mailing field of endeavor, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that, given the existing technical ability to combine the elements as evidenced by Reference Burton in view of Reference Young, the results of the combination were predictable (MPEP 2143 A);
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Burton in view of Young shows:
“screening out the logistics products which are already available in a target store from the logistics product set after the second screening, so as to obtain a logistics product set after the third screening, wherein the target store is a store for mailing the target article; and
according to the logistics product set after the third screening, determining the target logistics product for mailing the target article.”
Reference Burton “screening out the … products which are already available in a … from the logistics product set after the second screening, so as to obtain a logistics product set after the third screening, wherein the target store is a store for mailing the target article; and according to the … product set after the third screening, ….” (Burton: [0037] It will be understood that the invention is not limited to CDs and/or DVDs and the mechanisms for packaging same, but to any items which can be processed in accordance with the methods described herein below. Exemplary items in addition to those described include: brochures, books, card packs, clothing items and any other item wherein groups of the same item have similar characteristics such as size or weight and are capable of automated handling in the described manner. [0044] Continuing with reference to FIG. 13, subsequently, the list of ordered items is retrieved from the customer order data and the pertinent mail characteristics for each ordered item are retrieved from table 43 (step 94). The pertinent postal data is retrieved from table 40, and the total items in the customer order are considered to determine if a single package would exceed the desired postal rates (step 96). For example, assuming that CDs and DVDs are being mailed, it is likely that the determining characteristic for postage would be weight. Thus, the weight of each ordered item is retrieved and the total weight calculated to see if it exceeds the maximum weight for the desired postal class and rate. For items where thickness or other size measurements or other characteristics are determinative of postal rates, the determinative characteristic(s) would be retrieved for each item and totaled. [0045] If a single package can be assembled and mailed at the desired postal rate (step 98), then those steps are performed (step 100, returning to step 106 of FIG. 12). If a single package cannot be assembled and mailed at the desired postal rate (step 98), then the number of packages including the exact item contents of each package is determined (step 102), and the package is assembled and mailed (step 104, returning to step 106 of FIG. 12). Many different methods will be readily apparent for determining how to assemble groups of items within the desired postal rate. For example, a sub-order of items may simply be selected in order from a list until the maximum characteristic, i.e. weight, is reached, then a new sub-order started. Other more complex methods may be used to group items by the appropriate characteristic. Still other more complex methods may be used to group items both by a first characteristic relevant to postal rates and a second characteristic not relevant to postal rates but otherwise relevant to fulfilling the customer order, for example a second characteristic based on grouping similar types of items.
Reference Burton does not explicitly show “logistics” and “determining a target logistics product for mailing the target article” as is discussed in the claim limitations above. Reference Young shows “logistics” and “determining a target logistics product for mailing the target article” ((col. 11, lines 50-66: 39) As illustrated in FIG. 5, a packaging information system may in some embodiments include an upstream fulfillment planning engine 510, configured to determine the facility or facilities to which an item group or complete customer order should be directed. As described above, a fulfillment planning engine 510 may in some embodiments be configured to determine whether or not a single fulfillment facility is able to provide all of the items in an order, and may pass subsets of a customer order to the smallest number of fulfillment facilities that may supply the required items. In other embodiments, fulfillment planning engine 510 may be configured to divide a customer order into multiple item groups dependent on other parameters, including, but not limited to, a service level agreement, the location of one or more facilities with respect to a destination, customer and/or order priorities (e.g., premium customer service or premium shipping considerations), specialty transportation service availability, or specialty services capability (e.g., gift wrapping or export services). Col. 12, lines 1-20: Fulfillment planning engine 510 may provide item data 515 for one or more items of one or more customer orders to be fulfilled, to one or more shipping consolidation analyzers 520 (e.g., to a shipping consolidation analyzer 520 in each of two or more target facility or to one or more centrally located shipping consolidation analyzers 520 on behalf of one or more target facilities). For instance, fulfillment planning engine 510 may be integrated with an e-commerce portal configured to receive customer orders for one or more items; the fulfillment planning engine may provide indications of such items to one or more shipping consolidation analyzers for fulfillment. In some embodiments, shipping consolidation analyzer 520 may provide feedback to fulfillment planning engine 510 (e.g., feedback indicating the results of shipment consolidation analysis, the configuration of a target facility, the capabilities and available services of a target facility, the available containers of a target facility, etc.). In the example illustrated in FIG. 5, fulfillment planning engine 510 may also provide item group data 515 to data store 500 for storage and/or future analysis (not shown). Col. 13, lines 34-57: For example, a user may request one or more reports regarding the number or percentage of item groups consolidated, the number or average number of items in each shipment set, the number or percentage of item groups requiring exception handling for shipment consolidation, the number or percentage of item groups shipped as whole or partial palettes, or the performance of the overall packaging operation in terms of speed, rework, or meeting transportation schedules. In some embodiments, trends of each of these metrics may be reported and/or analyzed in order to identify opportunities to improve the shipment consolidation method and/or the configuration of a given materials handling facility. For example, if one of these metrics changes by a given percentage (up or down), the shipment consolidation analyzer may be configured to flag the change and/or to trigger a review of the performance of the packaging information system or the operation of a given facility. Col. 13, lines 58-67, col. 14, lines 1-10: While the embodiment illustrated by FIG. 5 includes a fulfillment planning engine 510, a shipment consolidation analyzer 520, and a container recommender 540 that are separate components of a system configured to manage packing/shipping operations in a materials handling facility on behalf of an order fulfillment operation, in other embodiments, the functionality described as being performed by each of these components may all be performed by sub-components of a single system component, or may be partitioned in other ways. For example, in one embodiment, container recommender 540 may be implemented as a module of a software application configured to implement shipment consolidation analyzer 520. In another example, data store 500 may be located in a memory of the same computing node or of a different computing node than a memory that includes program instructions configured to implement a packaging information system, fulfillment planning engine 510, shipment consolidation analyzer 520 and/or container recommended 540. Col. 15, lines 14-24: A shipping consolidation analyzer may be further described using the following example. In this example, an e-commerce organization sells items of various types that can be shipped to customers, and a customer may place an order for an arbitrary quantity of each of any number of different items. A customer order may be provided to a materials handling facility intact (e.g., containing all of the items in a given customer order) or may be divided into two or more item groups by a fulfillment planning engine, as described herein. FIGS. 6A-6C illustrate various groupings of items in one such item group, according to one embodiment. Reference Young also shows “target store” col. 7, lines 27-42: A packaging information system, including a shipping consolidation analyzer, as described herein in various embodiments, may be utilized in a number of different facilities and situations, including, but not limited to materials handling facilities, order fulfillment centers, rental centers, distribution centers, packaging facilities, shipping facilities, libraries, museums, warehouse storage facilities, and the like. Note that the arrangement and order of operations illustrated by FIG. 1 is merely one example of many possible embodiments of the operation of an order fulfillment facility utilizing a packaging information system or stand-alone shipping consolidation analyzer. Other types of materials handling, manufacturing, or order fulfillment facilities suitable for application of a shipping consolidation analyzer may include different, fewer, or additional operations and resources, according to different embodiments.
Reference Burton and Reference Young are analogous prior art to the claimed invention because the references generally relate to field of optimizing package mailing (Burton [0009]-[0011], Young col. 6, lines 46-67). Further, said references are part of the same classification, i.e., G06Q10. Lastly, said references are filed before the effective filing date of the instant application; hence, said references are analogous prior-art references.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this application for AIA to provide the teachings of Reference Young, particularly the computer readable medium (Young: col. 2, lines 31-63, Col. 5, lines 56-63), in the disclosure of Reference Burton, particularly in the computer and computer program products ([0029]-[0035], [0037], [0045]-[0050]: [0045]), in order to provide for a computer system that includes a computer readable medium as taught by Reference Young (see at least in col. 2, lines 31-63, Col. 5, lines 56-63), where upon the execution of the method and system of Reference Young for selectively applying an item sortation process may include a shipping consolidation analyzer, which may in various embodiments be implemented as a component of a packing information system. A packaging information system may include various components used to facilitate efficient and/or cost-effective operations in a materials handling facility (Young: col. 2, lines 33-41) so that the process of optimizing package mailing can be made more efficient and effective.
Further, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements in a similar optimizing package mailing field of endeavor, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that, given the existing technical ability to combine the elements as evidenced by Reference Burton in view of Reference Young, the results of the combination were predictable (MPEP 2143 A).
As per claims 3 and 20: Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Burton in view of Young shows:
“The method of claim 1:
An electronic device, comprising: at least one processors; and
a storage apparatus, configured to store at least one programs, wherein the at least one programs, when executed by the at least one processors, enable the at least one processors to implement the method according to claim 3
wherein the according to the logistics product set after the third screening, determining the target logistics product for mailing the target article comprises:
in response to the determination for that a target logistics product exists in the logistics product set after the third screening, determining at least one target logistics product, wherein the target logistics product comprises:”
Although Reference Burton discloses computer and computer program products ([0029]-[0035], [0037], [0045]-[0050]: [0045]), Reference Burton does not explicitly show computer readable medium as is discussed in the claim limitations above. Reference Young shows “computer readable medium” and as such the limitations discussed above at least in col. 2, lines 31-63: Various embodiments of a system and method for selectively applying an item sortation process are described. The system and method for selectively applying an item sortation process may include a shipping consolidation analyzer, which may in various embodiments be implemented as a component of a packing information system. A packaging information system may include various components used to facilitate efficient and/or cost-effective operations in a materials handling facility. For example, in some embodiments, a packaging information system may include a shipping consolidation analyzer configured to facilitate packing and shipping operations by determining if and how a given group of items should be consolidated into one or more shipments. The shipping consolidation analyzer described herein may be implemented in one or more software modules executing on one or more nodes of a computing system (e.g., as program instructions and data structures configured to implement functionality described), or in any combination of hardware and software components suitable for implementing the functionality described. For example, the shipping consolidation analyzer may in some embodiments be implemented as program instructions encoded on a computer-readable storage medium for execution by a computing system. For illustrative purposes, some embodiments of a shipping consolidation analyzer are described below in which particular item and container parameters are analyzed in particular manners, and in which particular types of analyses and processing of parameters are performed. However, those skilled in the art will appreciate that the techniques described may be used in a wide variety of other situations, and that embodiments of these techniques are not limited to the details of these examples. Col. 5, lines 56-63: Note that, as used herein, "item groups" may refer to items grouped for shipping to a customer or items grouped for any other operation within a materials handling facility, such as for storing in inventory or transporting to a packing or shipping station. In various embodiments, "containers" may include pallets, crates, cases, bins, boxes, carts, totes, conveyor belts, shelves, cabinets, or any other apparatus capable of storing, conveying or shipping one or more items.
Reference Burton and Reference Young are analogous prior art to the claimed invention because the references generally relate to field of optimizing package mailing (Burton [0009]-[0011], Young col. 6, lines 46-67). Further, said references are part of the same classification, i.e., G06Q10. Lastly, said references are filed before the effective filing date of the instant application; hence, said references are analogous prior-art references.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this application for AIA to provide the teachings of Reference Young, particularly the computer readable medium (Young: col. 2, lines 31-63, Col. 5, lines 56-63), in the disclosure of Reference Burton, particularly in the computer and computer program products ([0029]-[0035], [0037], [0045]-[0050]: [0045]), in order to provide for a computer system that includes a computer readable medium as taught by Reference Young (see at least in col. 2, lines 31-63, Col. 5, lines 56-63), where upon the execution of the method and system of Reference Young for selectively applying an item sortation process may include a shipping consolidation analyzer, which may in various embodiments be implemented as a component of a packing information system. A packaging information system may include various components used to facilitate efficient and/or cost-effective operations in a materials handling facility (Young: col. 2, lines 33-41) so that the process of optimizing package mailing can be made more efficient and effective.
Further, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements in a similar optimizing package mailing field of endeavor, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that, given the existing technical ability to combine the elements as evidenced by Reference Burton in view of Reference Young, the results of the combination were predictable (MPEP 2143 A);
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Burton in view of Young shows:
“logistics products of the type of same- city mailing;
screening out logistics products with routes to reach the collection station information and the delivery station information from the at least one target logistics product, so as to obtain a logistics product set after the fourth screening;
in response to the determination for that the target store sets priority levels for the logistics product set after the fourth screening, obtaining the priority level set by the target store in advance, of each logistics product in the logistics product set after the fourth screening; and
determining the logistics product with the priority level which meets a target condition in the logistics product set after the fourth screening as the target logistics product.”
Reference Burton “logistics products of the type of same- city mailing;
screening out logistics products with routes to reach the collection station information and the delivery station information from the at least one target logistics product, so as to obtain a logistics product set after the fourth screening;
in response to the determination for that the target store sets … levels for the logistics product set after the fourth screening, obtaining the … level set by the target store in advance, of each logistics product in the logistics product set after the fourth screening; and
determining the logistics product with the … level which meets a target condition in the logistics product set after the fourth screening as the target logistics product”
Reference Burton: [0037] It will be understood that the invention is not limited to CDs and/or DVDs and the mechanisms for packaging same, but to any items which can be processed in accordance with the methods described herein below. Exemplary items in addition to those described include: brochures, books, card packs, clothing items and any other item wherein groups of the same item have similar characteristics such as size or weight and are capable of automated handling in the described manner. [0044] Continuing with reference to FIG. 13, subsequently, the list of ordered items is retrieved from the customer order data and the pertinent mail characteristics for each ordered item are retrieved from table 43 (step 94). The pertinent postal data is retrieved from table 40, and the total items in the customer order are considered to determine if a single package would exceed the desired postal rates (step 96). For example, assuming that CDs and DVDs are being mailed, it is likely that the determining characteristic for postage would be weight. Thus, the weight of each ordered item is retrieved and the total weight calculated to see if it exceeds the maximum weight for the desired postal class and rate. For items where thickness or other size measurements or other characteristics are determinative of postal rates, the determinative characteristic(s) would be retrieved for each item and totaled. [0045] If a single package can be assembled and mailed at the desired postal rate (step 98), then those steps are performed (step 100, returning to step 106 of FIG. 12). If a single package cannot be assembled and mailed at the desired postal rate (step 98), then the number of packages including the exact item contents of each package is determined (step 102), and the package is assembled and mailed (step 104, returning to step 106 of FIG. 12). Many different methods will be readily apparent for determining how to assemble groups of items within the desired postal rate. For example, a sub-order of items may simply be selected in order from a list until the maximum characteristic, i.e. weight, is reached, then a new sub-order started. Other more complex methods may be used to group items by the appropriate characteristic. Still other more complex methods may be used to group items both by a first characteristic relevant to postal rates and a second characteristic not relevant to postal rates but otherwise relevant to fulfilling the customer order, for example a second characteristic based on grouping similar types of items.
Reference Burton does not explicitly show “logistics”, “priority” and “determining a target logistics product for mailing the target article” as is discussed in the claim limitations above. Reference Young shows “logistics”, “priority” and “determining a target logistics product for mailing the target article” ((col. 11, lines 50-66: 39) As illustrated in FIG. 5, a packaging information system may in some embodiments include an upstream fulfillment planning engine 510, configured to determine the facility or facilities to which an item group or complete customer order should be directed. As described above, a fulfillment planning engine 510 may in some embodiments be configured to determine whether or not a single fulfillment facility is able to provide all of the items in an order, and may pass subsets of a customer order to the smallest number of fulfillment facilities that may supply the required items. In other embodiments, fulfillment planning engine 510 may be configured to divide a customer order into multiple item groups dependent on other parameters, including, but not limited to, a service level agreement, the location of one or more facilities with respect to a destination, customer and/or order priorities (e.g., premium customer service or premium shipping considerations), specialty transportation service availability, or specialty services capability (e.g., gift wrapping or export services). Col. 12, lines 1-20: Fulfillment planning engine 510 may provide item data 515 for one or more items of one or more customer orders to be fulfilled, to one or more shipping consolidation analyzers 520 (e.g., to a shipping consolidation analyzer 520 in each of two or more target facility or to one or more centrally located shipping consolidation analyzers 520 on behalf of one or more target facilities). For instance, fulfillment planning engine 510 may be integrated with an e-commerce portal configured to receive customer orders for one or more items; the fulfillment planning engine may provide indications of such items to one or more shipping consolidation analyzers for fulfillment. In some embodiments, shipping consolidation analyzer 520 may provide feedback to fulfillment planning engine 510 (e.g., feedback indicating the results of shipment consolidation analysis, the configuration of a target facility, the capabilities and available services of a target facility, the available containers of a target facility, etc.). In the example illustrated in FIG. 5, fulfillment planning engine 510 may also provide item group data 515 to data store 500 for storage and/or future analysis (not shown). Col. 13, lines 34-57: For example, a user may request one or more reports regarding the number or percentage of item groups consolidated, the number or average number of items in each shipment set, the number or percentage of item groups requiring exception handling for shipment consolidation, the number or percentage of item groups shipped as whole or partial palettes, or the performance of the overall packaging operation in terms of speed, rework, or meeting transportation schedules. In some embodiments, trends of each of these metrics may be reported and/or analyzed in order to identify opportunities to improve the shipment consolidation method and/or the configuration of a given materials handling facility. For example, if one of these metrics changes by a given percentage (up or down), the shipment consolidation analyzer may be configured to flag the change and/or to trigger a review of the performance of the packaging information system or the operation of a given facility. Col. 13, lines 58-67, col. 14, lines 1-10: While the embodiment illustrated by FIG. 5 includes a fulfillment planning engine 510, a shipment consolidation analyzer 520, and a container recommender 540 that are separate components of a system configured to manage packing/shipping operations in a materials handling facility on behalf of an order fulfillment operation, in other embodiments, the functionality described as being performed by each of these components may all be performed by sub-components of a single system component, or may be partitioned in other ways. For example, in one embodiment, container recommender 540 may be implemented as a module of a software application configured to implement shipment consolidation analyzer 520. In another example, data store 500 may be located in a memory of the same computing node or of a different computing node than a memory that includes program instructions configured to implement a packaging information system, fulfillment planning engine 510, shipment consolidation analyzer 520 and/or container recommended 540. Col. 15, lines 14-24: A shipping consolidation analyzer may be further described using the following example. In this example, an e-commerce organization sells items of various types that can be shipped to customers, and a customer may place an order for an arbitrary quantity of each of any number of different items. A customer order may be provided to a materials handling facility intact (e.g., containing all of the items in a given customer order) or may be divided into two or more item groups by a fulfillment planning engine, as described herein. FIGS. 6A-6C illustrate various groupings of items in one such item group, according to one embodiment. Reference Young also shows “target store” col. 7, lines 27-42: A packaging information system, including a shipping consolidation analyzer, as described herein in various embodiments, may be utilized in a number of different facilities and situations, including, but not limited to materials handling facilities, order fulfillment centers, rental centers, distribution centers, packaging facilities, shipping facilities, libraries, museums, warehouse storage facilities, and the like. Note that the arrangement and order of operations illustrated by FIG. 1 is merely one example of many possible embodiments of the operation of an order fulfillment facility utilizing a packaging information system or stand-alone shipping consolidation analyzer. Other types of materials handling, manufacturing, or order fulfillment facilities suitable for application of a shipping consolidation analyzer may include different, fewer, or additional operations and resources, according to different embodiments. Reference Young also shows “priority levels” col. 11, lines 50-67: As illustrated in FIG. 5, a packaging information system may in some embodiments include an upstream fulfillment planning engine 510, configured to determine the facility or facilities to which an item group or complete customer order should be directed. As described above, a fulfillment planning engine 510 may in some embodiments be configured to determine whether or not a single fulfillment facility is able to provide all of the items in an order, and may pass subsets of a customer order to the smallest number of fulfillment facilities that may supply the required items. In other embodiments, fulfillment planning engine 510 may be configured to divide a customer order into multiple item groups dependent on other parameters, including, but not limited to, a service level agreement, the location of one or more facilities with respect to a destination, customer and/or order priorities (e.g., premium customer service or premium shipping considerations), specialty transportation service availability, or specialty services capability (e.g., gift wrapping or export services).
Reference Burton and Reference Young are analogous prior art to the claimed invention because the references generally relate to field of optimizing package mailing (Burton [0009]-[0011], Young col. 6, lines 46-67). Further, said references are part of the same classification, i.e., G06Q10. Lastly, said references are filed before the effective filing date of the instant application; hence, said references are analogous prior-art references.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this application for AIA to provide the teachings of Reference Young, particularly the computer readable medium (Young: col. 2, lines 31-63, Col. 5, lines 56-63), in the disclosure of Reference Burton, particularly in the computer and computer program products ([0029]-[0035], [0037], [0045]-[0050]: [0045]), in order to provide for a computer system that includes a computer readable medium as taught by Reference Young (see at least in col. 2, lines 31-63, Col. 5, lines 56-63), where upon the execution of the method and system of Reference Young for selectively applying an item sortation process may include a shipping consolidation analyzer, which may in various embodiments be implemented as a component of a packing information system. A packaging information system may include various components used to facilitate efficient and/or cost-effective operations in a materials handling facility (Young: col. 2, lines 33-41) so that the process of optimizing package mailing can be made more efficient and effective.
Further, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements in a similar optimizing package mailing field of endeavor, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that, given the existing technical ability to combine the elements as evidenced by Reference Burton in view of Reference Young, the results of the combination were predictable (MPEP 2143 A).
As per claim 4: Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Burton in view of Young shows:
“further comprising:
in response to the determination for that the target logistics product does not exist in the logistics product set after the third screening, screening out logistics products with routes to reach the collection station information and the delivery station information from the logistics product set after the third screening, so as to obtain a logistics product set after the fifth screening;
in response to the determination for that the target store sets priority levels for the logistics product set after the fifth screening, obtaining the priority level of each logistics product in the logistics product set after the fifth screening; and
determining the logistics product with the priority level which meets the target condition in the logistics product set after the fifth screening as the target logistics product.”
Reference Burton: [0037] It will be understood that the invention is not limited to CDs and/or DVDs and the mechanisms for packaging same, but to any items which can be processed in accordance with the methods described herein below. Exemplary items in addition to those described include: brochures, books, card packs, clothing items and any other item wherein groups of the same item have similar characteristics such as size or weight and are capable of automated handling in the described manner. [0044] Continuing with reference to FIG. 13, subsequently, the list of ordered items is retrieved from the customer order data and the pertinent mail characteristics for each ordered item are retrieved from table 43 (step 94). The pertinent postal data is retrieved from table 40, and the total items in the customer order are considered to determine if a single package would exceed the desired postal rates (step 96). For example, assuming that CDs and DVDs are being mailed, it is likely that the determining characteristic for postage would be weight. Thus, the weight of each ordered item is retrieved and the total weight calculated to see if it exceeds the maximum weight for the desired postal class and rate. For items where thickness or other size measurements or other characteristics are determinative of postal rates, the determinative characteristic(s) would be retrieved for each item and totaled. [0045] If a single package can be assembled and mailed at the desired postal rate (step 98), then those steps are performed (step 100, returning to step 106 of FIG. 12). If a single package cannot be assembled and mailed at the desired postal rate (step 98), then the number of packages including the exact item contents of each package is determined (step 102), and the package is assembled and mailed (step 104, returning to step 106 of FIG. 12). Many different methods will be readily apparent for determining how to assemble groups of items within the desired postal rate. For example, a sub-order of items may simply be selected in order from a list until the maximum characteristic, i.e. weight, is reached, then a new sub-order started. Other more complex methods may be used to group items by the appropriate characteristic. Still other more complex methods may be used to group items both by a first characteristic relevant to postal rates and a second characteristic not relevant to postal rates but otherwise relevant to fulfilling the customer order, for example a second characteristic based on grouping similar types of items.
Reference Burton does not explicitly show “logistics”, “priority” and “determining the logistics product with the priority level which meets the target condition” as is discussed in the claim limitations above. Reference Young shows “logistics”, “priority” and “determining the logistics product with the priority level which meets the target condition” ((col. 11, lines 50-66: 39) As illustrated in FIG. 5, a packaging information system may in some embodiments include an upstream fulfillment planning engine 510, configured to determine the facility or facilities to which an item group or complete customer order should be directed. As described above, a fulfillment planning engine 510 may in some embodiments be configured to determine whether or not a single fulfillment facility is able to provide all of the items in an order, and may pass subsets of a customer order to the smallest number of fulfillment facilities that may supply the required items. In other embodiments, fulfillment planning engine 510 may be configured to divide a customer order into multiple item groups dependent on other parameters, including, but not limited to, a service level agreement, the location of one or more facilities with respect to a destination, customer and/or order priorities (e.g., premium customer service or premium shipping considerations), specialty transportation service availability, or specialty services capability (e.g., gift wrapping or export services). Col. 12, lines 1-20: Fulfillment planning engine 510 may provide item data 515 for one or more items of one or more customer orders to be fulfilled, to one or more shipping consolidation analyzers 520 (e.g., to a shipping consolidation analyzer 520 in each of two or more target facility or to one or more centrally located shipping consolidation analyzers 520 on behalf of one or more target facilities). For instance, fulfillment planning engine 510 may be integrated with an e-commerce portal configured to receive customer orders for one or more items; the fulfillment planning engine may provide indications of such items to one or more shipping consolidation analyzers for fulfillment. In some embodiments, shipping consolidation analyzer 520 may provide feedback to fulfillment planning engine 510 (e.g., feedback indicating the results of shipment consolidation analysis, the configuration of a target facility, the capabilities and available services of a target facility, the available containers of a target facility, etc.). In the example illustrated in FIG. 5, fulfillment planning engine 510 may also provide item group data 515 to data store 500 for storage and/or future analysis (not shown). Col. 13, lines 34-57: For example, a user may request one or more reports regarding the number or percentage of item groups consolidated, the number or average number of items in each shipment set, the number or percentage of item groups requiring exception handling for shipment consolidation, the number or percentage of item groups shipped as whole or partial palettes, or the performance of the overall packaging operation in terms of speed, rework, or meeting transportation schedules. In some embodiments, trends of each of these metrics may be reported and/or analyzed in order to identify opportunities to improve the shipment consolidation method and/or the configuration of a given materials handling facility. For example, if one of these metrics changes by a given percentage (up or down), the shipment consolidation analyzer may be configured to flag the change and/or to trigger a review of the performance of the packaging information system or the operation of a given facility. Col. 13, lines 58-67, col. 14, lines 1-10: While the embodiment illustrated by FIG. 5 includes a fulfillment planning engine 510, a shipment consolidation analyzer 520, and a container recommender 540 that are separate components of a system configured to manage packing/shipping operations in a materials handling facility on behalf of an order fulfillment operation, in other embodiments, the functionality described as being performed by each of these components may all be performed by sub-components of a single system component, or may be partitioned in other ways. For example, in one embodiment, container recommender 540 may be implemented as a module of a software application configured to implement shipment consolidation analyzer 520. In another example, data store 500 may be located in a memory of the same computing node or of a different computing node than a memory that includes program instructions configured to implement a packaging information system, fulfillment planning engine 510, shipment consolidation analyzer 520 and/or container recommended 540. Col. 15, lines 14-24: A shipping consolidation analyzer may be further described using the following example. In this example, an e-commerce organization sells items of various types that can be shipped to customers, and a customer may place an order for an arbitrary quantity of each of any number of different items. A customer order may be provided to a materials handling facility intact (e.g., containing all of the items in a given customer order) or may be divided into two or more item groups by a fulfillment planning engine, as described herein. FIGS. 6A-6C illustrate various groupings of items in one such item group, according to one embodiment. Reference Young also shows “target store” col. 7, lines 27-42: A packaging information system, including a shipping consolidation analyzer, as described herein in various embodiments, may be utilized in a number of different facilities and situations, including, but not limited to materials handling facilities, order fulfillment centers, rental centers, distribution centers, packaging facilities, shipping facilities, libraries, museums, warehouse storage facilities, and the like. Note that the arrangement and order of operations illustrated by FIG. 1 is merely one example of many possible embodiments of the operation of an order fulfillment facility utilizing a packaging information system or stand-alone shipping consolidation analyzer. Other types of materials handling, manufacturing, or order fulfillment facilities suitable for application of a shipping consolidation analyzer may include different, fewer, or additional operations and resources, according to different embodiments. Reference Young also shows “priority levels” col. 11, lines 50-67: As illustrated in FIG. 5, a packaging information system may in some embodiments include an upstream fulfillment planning engine 510, configured to determine the facility or facilities to which an item group or complete customer order should be directed. As described above, a fulfillment planning engine 510 may in some embodiments be configured to determine whether or not a single fulfillment facility is able to provide all of the items in an order, and may pass subsets of a customer order to the smallest number of fulfillment facilities that may supply the required items. In other embodiments, fulfillment planning engine 510 may be configured to divide a customer order into multiple item groups dependent on other parameters, including, but not limited to, a service level agreement, the location of one or more facilities with respect to a destination, customer and/or order priorities (e.g., premium customer service or premium shipping considerations), specialty transportation service availability, or specialty services capability (e.g., gift wrapping or export services).
Reference Burton and Reference Young are analogous prior art to the claimed invention because the references generally relate to field of optimizing package mailing (Burton [0009]-[0011], Young col. 6, lines 46-67). Further, said references are part of the same classification, i.e., G06Q10. Lastly, said references are filed before the effective filing date of the instant application; hence, said references are analogous prior-art references.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this application for AIA to provide the teachings of Reference Young, particularly the computer readable medium (Young: col. 2, lines 31-63, Col. 5, lines 56-63), in the disclosure of Reference Burton, particularly in the computer and computer program products ([0029]-[0035], [0037], [0045]-[0050]: [0045]), in order to provide for a computer system that includes a computer readable medium as taught by Reference Young (see at least in col. 2, lines 31-63, Col. 5, lines 56-63), where upon the execution of the method and system of Reference Young for selectively applying an item sortation process may include a shipping consolidation analyzer, which may in various embodiments be implemented as a component of a packing information system. A packaging information system may include various components used to facilitate efficient and/or cost-effective operations in a materials handling facility (Young: col. 2, lines 33-41) so that the process of optimizing package mailing can be made more efficient and effective.
Further, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements in a similar optimizing package mailing field of endeavor, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that, given the existing technical ability to combine the elements as evidenced by Reference Burton in view of Reference Young, the results of the combination were predictable (MPEP 2143 A).
As per claims 5, 11, 12 and 13: Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Burton in view of Young shows:
“wherein the logistics property information comprises:
weight requirement information of the article to be mailed, height requirement information of the article to be mailed, width requirement information of the article to be mailed, length requirement information of the article to be mailed, and temperature requirement information of the article to be mailed; and
the according to logistics property information of logistics products, screening out at least one logistics product that matches the article property information and the article mailing service information from the logistics products, so as to obtain a logistics product set after the first screening comprises:”
Reference Burton shows “wherein the logistics property information comprises: weight requirement information of the article to be mailed, height requirement information of the article to be mailed, width requirement information of the article to be mailed, length requirement information of the article to be mailed, and temperature requirement information of the article to be mailed; and the according to logistics property information of … products, screening out at least one … product that matches the article property information and the article mailing service information from the …. products, so as to obtain a … product set after the first screening comprises:” [0030] With reference now to FIG. 3, postage rate table 40 contained in database 36 is seen to include postage rates based on mail package characteristics. For example, the table is seen to include postage rates based on package weight and postage rates based on package thickness. Other characteristics affecting postage rates will be known to those skilled in the art. [0032] With reference now to FIG. 5, an item characteristic data table 43 contained in database 36 is seen to include characteristics relating to items to be mailed, and more particularly characteristics relevant to the postal rates of FIG. 3. Each item entry, that is each row of data, is seen to include a weight and thickness that can be used to determine postal mailing costs. [0037] It will be understood that the invention is not limited to CDs and/or DVDs and the mechanisms for packaging same, but to any items which can be processed in accordance with the methods described herein below. Exemplary items in addition to those described include: brochures, books, card packs, clothing items and any other item wherein groups of the same item have similar characteristics such as size or weight and are capable of automated handling in the described manner. [0044] Continuing with reference to FIG. 13, subsequently, the list of ordered items is retrieved from the customer order data and the pertinent mail characteristics for each ordered item are retrieved from table 43 (step 94). The pertinent postal data is retrieved from table 40, and the total items in the customer order are considered to determine if a single package would exceed the desired postal rates (step 96). For example, assuming that CDs and DVDs are being mailed, it is likely that the determining characteristic for postage would be weight. Thus, the weight of each ordered item is retrieved and the total weight calculated to see if it exceeds the maximum weight for the desired postal class and rate. For items where thickness or other size measurements or other characteristics are determinative of postal rates, the determinative characteristic(s) would be retrieved for each item and totaled. [0045] If a single package can be assembled and mailed at the desired postal rate (step 98), then those steps are performed (step 100, returning to step 106 of FIG. 12). If a single package cannot be assembled and mailed at the desired postal rate (step 98), then the number of packages including the exact item contents of each package is determined (step 102), and the package is assembled and mailed (step 104, returning to step 106 of FIG. 12). Many different methods will be readily apparent for determining how to assemble groups of items within the desired postal rate. For example, a sub-order of items may simply be selected in order from a list until the maximum characteristic, i.e. weight, is reached, then a new sub-order started. Other more complex methods may be used to group items by the appropriate characteristic. Still other more complex methods may be used to group items both by a first characteristic relevant to postal rates and a second characteristic not relevant to postal rates but otherwise relevant to fulfilling the customer order, for example a second characteristic based on grouping similar types of items.
Reference Burton does not explicitly show “logistics”, “priority” and “determining the logistics product with the priority level which meets the target condition” as is discussed in the claim limitations above. Reference Young shows “logistics”, “priority” and “determining the logistics product with the priority level which meets the target condition” ((col. 11, lines 50-66: 39) As illustrated in FIG. 5, a packaging information system may in some embodiments include an upstream fulfillment planning engine 510, configured to determine the facility or facilities to which an item group or complete customer order should be directed. As described above, a fulfillment planning engine 510 may in some embodiments be configured to determine whether or not a single fulfillment facility is able to provide all of the items in an order, and may pass subsets of a customer order to the smallest number of fulfillment facilities that may supply the required items. In other embodiments, fulfillment planning engine 510 may be configured to divide a customer order into multiple item groups dependent on other parameters, including, but not limited to, a service level agreement, the location of one or more facilities with respect to a destination, customer and/or order priorities (e.g., premium customer service or premium shipping considerations), specialty transportation service availability, or specialty services capability (e.g., gift wrapping or export services). Col. 12, lines 1-20: Fulfillment planning engine 510 may provide item data 515 for one or more items of one or more customer orders to be fulfilled, to one or more shipping consolidation analyzers 520 (e.g., to a shipping consolidation analyzer 520 in each of two or more target facility or to one or more centrally located shipping consolidation analyzers 520 on behalf of one or more target facilities). For instance, fulfillment planning engine 510 may be integrated with an e-commerce portal configured to receive customer orders for one or more items; the fulfillment planning engine may provide indications of such items to one or more shipping consolidation analyzers for fulfillment. In some embodiments, shipping consolidation analyzer 520 may provide feedback to fulfillment planning engine 510 (e.g., feedback indicating the results of shipment consolidation analysis, the configuration of a target facility, the capabilities and available services of a target facility, the available containers of a target facility, etc.). In the example illustrated in FIG. 5, fulfillment planning engine 510 may also provide item group data 515 to data store 500 for storage and/or future analysis (not shown). Col. 13, lines 34-57: For example, a user may request one or more reports regarding the number or percentage of item groups consolidated, the number or average number of items in each shipment set, the number or percentage of item groups requiring exception handling for shipment consolidation, the number or percentage of item groups shipped as whole or partial palettes, or the performance of the overall packaging operation in terms of speed, rework, or meeting transportation schedules. In some embodiments, trends of each of these metrics may be reported and/or analyzed in order to identify opportunities to improve the shipment consolidation method and/or the configuration of a given materials handling facility. For example, if one of these metrics changes by a given percentage (up or down), the shipment consolidation analyzer may be configured to flag the change and/or to trigger a review of the performance of the packaging information system or the operation of a given facility. Col. 13, lines 58-67, col. 14, lines 1-10: While the embodiment illustrated by FIG. 5 includes a fulfillment planning engine 510, a shipment consolidation analyzer 520, and a container recommender 540 that are separate components of a system configured to manage packing/shipping operations in a materials handling facility on behalf of an order fulfillment operation, in other embodiments, the functionality described as being performed by each of these components may all be performed by sub-components of a single system component, or may be partitioned in other ways. For example, in one embodiment, container recommender 540 may be implemented as a module of a software application configured to implement shipment consolidation analyzer 520. In another example, data store 500 may be located in a memory of the same computing node or of a different computing node than a memory that includes program instructions configured to implement a packaging information system, fulfillment planning engine 510, shipment consolidation analyzer 520 and/or container recommended 540. Col. 15, lines 14-24: A shipping consolidation analyzer may be further described using the following example. In this example, an e-commerce organization sells items of various types that can be shipped to customers, and a customer may place an order for an arbitrary quantity of each of any number of different items. A customer order may be provided to a materials handling facility intact (e.g., containing all of the items in a given customer order) or may be divided into two or more item groups by a fulfillment planning engine, as described herein. FIGS. 6A-6C illustrate various groupings of items in one such item group, according to one embodiment. Reference Young also shows “target store” col. 7, lines 27-42: A packaging information system, including a shipping consolidation analyzer, as described herein in various embodiments, may be utilized in a number of different facilities and situations, including, but not limited to materials handling facilities, order fulfillment centers, rental centers, distribution centers, packaging facilities, shipping facilities, libraries, museums, warehouse storage facilities, and the like. Note that the arrangement and order of operations illustrated by FIG. 1 is merely one example of many possible embodiments of the operation of an order fulfillment facility utilizing a packaging information system or stand-alone shipping consolidation analyzer. Other types of materials handling, manufacturing, or order fulfillment facilities suitable for application of a shipping consolidation analyzer may include different, fewer, or additional operations and resources, according to different embodiments. Reference Young also shows “priority levels” col. 11, lines 50-67: As illustrated in FIG. 5, a packaging information system may in some embodiments include an upstream fulfillment planning engine 510, configured to determine the facility or facilities to which an item group or complete customer order should be directed. As described above, a fulfillment planning engine 510 may in some embodiments be configured to determine whether or not a single fulfillment facility is able to provide all of the items in an order, and may pass subsets of a customer order to the smallest number of fulfillment facilities that may supply the required items. In other embodiments, fulfillment planning engine 510 may be configured to divide a customer order into multiple item groups dependent on other parameters, including, but not limited to, a service level agreement, the location of one or more facilities with respect to a destination, customer and/or order priorities (e.g., premium customer service or premium shipping considerations), specialty transportation service availability, or specialty services capability (e.g., gift wrapping or export services).
Reference Burton and Reference Young are analogous prior art to the claimed invention because the references generally relate to field of optimizing package mailing (Burton [0009]-[0011], Young col. 6, lines 46-67). Further, said references are part of the same classification, i.e., G06Q10. Lastly, said references are filed before the effective filing date of the instant application; hence, said references are analogous prior-art references.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this application for AIA to provide the teachings of Reference Young, particularly the computer readable medium (Young: col. 2, lines 31-63, Col. 5, lines 56-63), in the disclosure of Reference Burton, particularly in the computer and computer program products ([0029]-[0035], [0037], [0045]-[0050]: [0045]), in order to provide for a computer system that includes a computer readable medium as taught by Reference Young (see at least in col. 2, lines 31-63, Col. 5, lines 56-63), where upon the execution of the method and system of Reference Young for selectively applying an item sortation process may include a shipping consolidation analyzer, which may in various embodiments be implemented as a component of a packing information system. A packaging information system may include various components used to facilitate efficient and/or cost-effective operations in a materials handling facility (Young: col. 2, lines 33-41) so that the process of optimizing package mailing can be made more efficient and effective.
Further, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements in a similar optimizing package mailing field of endeavor, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that, given the existing technical ability to combine the elements as evidenced by Reference Burton in view of Reference Young, the results of the combination were predictable (MPEP 2143 A).
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Burton in view of Young shows:
“screening out logistics products with the article property information of the target article, which meets the weight requirement information, the height requirement information, the width requirement information, the length requirement information and the temperature requirement information, and related to the article mailing service information, so as to obtain a logistics product set after the first screening.”
Reference Burton shows “screening out … products with the article property information of the target article, which meets the weight requirement information, the height requirement information, the width requirement information, the length requirement information and the temperature requirement information, and related to the article mailing service information, so as to obtain a …. product set after the first screening” [0030] With reference now to FIG. 3, postage rate table 40 contained in database 36 is seen to include postage rates based on mail package characteristics. For example, the table is seen to include postage rates based on package weight and postage rates based on package thickness. Other characteristics affecting postage rates will be known to those skilled in the art. [0032] With reference now to FIG. 5, an item characteristic data table 43 contained in database 36 is seen to include characteristics relating to items to be mailed, and more particularly characteristics relevant to the postal rates of FIG. 3. Each item entry, that is each row of data, is seen to include a weight and thickness that can be used to determine postal mailing costs. [0037] It will be understood that the invention is not limited to CDs and/or DVDs and the mechanisms for packaging same, but to any items which can be processed in accordance with the methods described herein below. Exemplary items in addition to those described include: brochures, books, card packs, clothing items and any other item wherein groups of the same item have similar characteristics such as size or weight and are capable of automated handling in the described manner. [0044] Continuing with reference to FIG. 13, subsequently, the list of ordered items is retrieved from the customer order data and the pertinent mail characteristics for each ordered item are retrieved from table 43 (step 94). The pertinent postal data is retrieved from table 40, and the total items in the customer order are considered to determine if a single package would exceed the desired postal rates (step 96). For example, assuming that CDs and DVDs are being mailed, it is likely that the determining characteristic for postage would be weight. Thus, the weight of each ordered item is retrieved and the total weight calculated to see if it exceeds the maximum weight for the desired postal class and rate. For items where thickness or other size measurements or other characteristics are determinative of postal rates, the determinative characteristic(s) would be retrieved for each item and totaled. [0045] If a single package can be assembled and mailed at the desired postal rate (step 98), then those steps are performed (step 100, returning to step 106 of FIG. 12). If a single package cannot be assembled and mailed at the desired postal rate (step 98), then the number of packages including the exact item contents of each package is determined (step 102), and the package is assembled and mailed (step 104, returning to step 106 of FIG. 12). Many different methods will be readily apparent for determining how to assemble groups of items within the desired postal rate. For example, a sub-order of items may simply be selected in order from a list until the maximum characteristic, i.e. weight, is reached, then a new sub-order started. Other more complex methods may be used to group items by the appropriate characteristic. Still other more complex methods may be used to group items both by a first characteristic relevant to postal rates and a second characteristic not relevant to postal rates but otherwise relevant to fulfilling the customer order, for example a second characteristic based on grouping similar types of items.
Reference Burton does not explicitly show “logistics”, “priority” and “determining the logistics product with the priority level which meets the target condition” as is discussed in the claim limitations above. Reference Young shows “logistics”, “priority” and “determining the logistics product with the priority level which meets the target condition” ((col. 11, lines 50-66: 39) As illustrated in FIG. 5, a packaging information system may in some embodiments include an upstream fulfillment planning engine 510, configured to determine the facility or facilities to which an item group or complete customer order should be directed. As described above, a fulfillment planning engine 510 may in some embodiments be configured to determine whether or not a single fulfillment facility is able to provide all of the items in an order, and may pass subsets of a customer order to the smallest number of fulfillment facilities that may supply the required items. In other embodiments, fulfillment planning engine 510 may be configured to divide a customer order into multiple item groups dependent on other parameters, including, but not limited to, a service level agreement, the location of one or more facilities with respect to a destination, customer and/or order priorities (e.g., premium customer service or premium shipping considerations), specialty transportation service availability, or specialty services capability (e.g., gift wrapping or export services). Col. 12, lines 1-20: Fulfillment planning engine 510 may provide item data 515 for one or more items of one or more customer orders to be fulfilled, to one or more shipping consolidation analyzers 520 (e.g., to a shipping consolidation analyzer 520 in each of two or more target facility or to one or more centrally located shipping consolidation analyzers 520 on behalf of one or more target facilities). For instance, fulfillment planning engine 510 may be integrated with an e-commerce portal configured to receive customer orders for one or more items; the fulfillment planning engine may provide indications of such items to one or more shipping consolidation analyzers for fulfillment. In some embodiments, shipping consolidation analyzer 520 may provide feedback to fulfillment planning engine 510 (e.g., feedback indicating the results of shipment consolidation analysis, the configuration of a target facility, the capabilities and available services of a target facility, the available containers of a target facility, etc.). In the example illustrated in FIG. 5, fulfillment planning engine 510 may also provide item group data 515 to data store 500 for storage and/or future analysis (not shown). Col. 13, lines 34-57: For example, a user may request one or more reports regarding the number or percentage of item groups consolidated, the number or average number of items in each shipment set, the number or percentage of item groups requiring exception handling for shipment consolidation, the number or percentage of item groups shipped as whole or partial palettes, or the performance of the overall packaging operation in terms of speed, rework, or meeting transportation schedules. In some embodiments, trends of each of these metrics may be reported and/or analyzed in order to identify opportunities to improve the shipment consolidation method and/or the configuration of a given materials handling facility. For example, if one of these metrics changes by a given percentage (up or down), the shipment consolidation analyzer may be configured to flag the change and/or to trigger a review of the performance of the packaging information system or the operation of a given facility. Col. 13, lines 58-67, col. 14, lines 1-10: While the embodiment illustrated by FIG. 5 includes a fulfillment planning engine 510, a shipment consolidation analyzer 520, and a container recommender 540 that are separate components of a system configured to manage packing/shipping operations in a materials handling facility on behalf of an order fulfillment operation, in other embodiments, the functionality described as being performed by each of these components may all be performed by sub-components of a single system component, or may be partitioned in other ways. For example, in one embodiment, container recommender 540 may be implemented as a module of a software application configured to implement shipment consolidation analyzer 520. In another example, data store 500 may be located in a memory of the same computing node or of a different computing node than a memory that includes program instructions configured to implement a packaging information system, fulfillment planning engine 510, shipment consolidation analyzer 520 and/or container recommended 540. Col. 15, lines 14-24: A shipping consolidation analyzer may be further described using the following example. In this example, an e-commerce organization sells items of various types that can be shipped to customers, and a customer may place an order for an arbitrary quantity of each of any number of different items. A customer order may be provided to a materials handling facility intact (e.g., containing all of the items in a given customer order) or may be divided into two or more item groups by a fulfillment planning engine, as described herein. FIGS. 6A-6C illustrate various groupings of items in one such item group, according to one embodiment. Reference Young also shows “target store” col. 7, lines 27-42: A packaging information system, including a shipping consolidation analyzer, as described herein in various embodiments, may be utilized in a number of different facilities and situations, including, but not limited to materials handling facilities, order fulfillment centers, rental centers, distribution centers, packaging facilities, shipping facilities, libraries, museums, warehouse storage facilities, and the like. Note that the arrangement and order of operations illustrated by FIG. 1 is merely one example of many possible embodiments of the operation of an order fulfillment facility utilizing a packaging information system or stand-alone shipping consolidation analyzer. Other types of materials handling, manufacturing, or order fulfillment facilities suitable for application of a shipping consolidation analyzer may include different, fewer, or additional operations and resources, according to different embodiments. Reference Young also shows “priority levels” col. 11, lines 50-67: As illustrated in FIG. 5, a packaging information system may in some embodiments include an upstream fulfillment planning engine 510, configured to determine the facility or facilities to which an item group or complete customer order should be directed. As described above, a fulfillment planning engine 510 may in some embodiments be configured to determine whether or not a single fulfillment facility is able to provide all of the items in an order, and may pass subsets of a customer order to the smallest number of fulfillment facilities that may supply the required items. In other embodiments, fulfillment planning engine 510 may be configured to divide a customer order into multiple item groups dependent on other parameters, including, but not limited to, a service level agreement, the location of one or more facilities with respect to a destination, customer and/or order priorities (e.g., premium customer service or premium shipping considerations), specialty transportation service availability, or specialty services capability (e.g., gift wrapping or export services).
Reference Burton and Reference Young are analogous prior art to the claimed invention because the references generally relate to field of optimizing package mailing (Burton [0009]-[0011], Young col. 6, lines 46-67). Further, said references are part of the same classification, i.e., G06Q10. Lastly, said references are filed before the effective filing date of the instant application; hence, said references are analogous prior-art references.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this application for AIA to provide the teachings of Reference Young, particularly the computer readable medium (Young: col. 2, lines 31-63, Col. 5, lines 56-63), in the disclosure of Reference Burton, particularly in the computer and computer program products ([0029]-[0035], [0037], [0045]-[0050]: [0045]), in order to provide for a computer system that includes a computer readable medium as taught by Reference Young (see at least in col. 2, lines 31-63, Col. 5, lines 56-63), where upon the execution of the method and system of Reference Young for selectively applying an item sortation process may include a shipping consolidation analyzer, which may in various embodiments be implemented as a component of a packing information system. A packaging information system may include various components used to facilitate efficient and/or cost-effective operations in a materials handling facility (Young: col. 2, lines 33-41) so that the process of optimizing package mailing can be made more efficient and effective.
Further, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements in a similar optimizing package mailing field of endeavor, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that, given the existing technical ability to combine the elements as evidenced by Reference Burton in view of Reference Young, the results of the combination were predictable (MPEP 2143 A).
As per claim 6: Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Burton in view of Young shows:
“wherein the method further comprises:
in response to the determination for that the target store does not set priority levels for the logistics product set after the fifth screening, determining alternative priority levels of the logistics products;
according to the alternative priority levels of the logistics products, determining the priority level of each logistics product in the logistics product set after the fifth screening; and
determining the logistics product with the priority level which meets the target condition in the logistics product set after the fifth screening as the target logistics product.”
Reference Burton shows “wherein the method further comprises: in response to the determination for that the … does not set … levels for the … product set after the fifth screening, determining alternative … levels of the … products; according to the alternative … levels of the … products, determining the … level of each … product in the … product set after the fifth screening; and determining the … product with the … level which meets the target condition in the … product set after the fifth screening as the target … product.” [0030] With reference now to FIG. 3, postage rate table 40 contained in database 36 is seen to include postage rates based on mail package characteristics. For example, the table is seen to include postage rates based on package weight and postage rates based on package thickness. Other characteristics affecting postage rates will be known to those skilled in the art. [0032] With reference now to FIG. 5, an item characteristic data table 43 contained in database 36 is seen to include characteristics relating to items to be mailed, and more particularly characteristics relevant to the postal rates of FIG. 3. Each item entry, that is each row of data, is seen to include a weight and thickness that can be used to determine postal mailing costs. [0037] It will be understood that the invention is not limited to CDs and/or DVDs and the mechanisms for packaging same, but to any items which can be processed in accordance with the methods described herein below. Exemplary items in addition to those described include: brochures, books, card packs, clothing items and any other item wherein groups of the same item have similar characteristics such as size or weight and are capable of automated handling in the described manner. [0044] Continuing with reference to FIG. 13, subsequently, the list of ordered items is retrieved from the customer order data and the pertinent mail characteristics for each ordered item are retrieved from table 43 (step 94). The pertinent postal data is retrieved from table 40, and the total items in the customer order are considered to determine if a single package would exceed the desired postal rates (step 96). For example, assuming that CDs and DVDs are being mailed, it is likely that the determining characteristic for postage would be weight. Thus, the weight of each ordered item is retrieved and the total weight calculated to see if it exceeds the maximum weight for the desired postal class and rate. For items where thickness or other size measurements or other characteristics are determinative of postal rates, the determinative characteristic(s) would be retrieved for each item and totaled. [0045] If a single package can be assembled and mailed at the desired postal rate (step 98), then those steps are performed (step 100, returning to step 106 of FIG. 12). If a single package cannot be assembled and mailed at the desired postal rate (step 98), then the number of packages including the exact item contents of each package is determined (step 102), and the package is assembled and mailed (step 104, returning to step 106 of FIG. 12). Many different methods will be readily apparent for determining how to assemble groups of items within the desired postal rate. For example, a sub-order of items may simply be selected in order from a list until the maximum characteristic, i.e. weight, is reached, then a new sub-order started. Other more complex methods may be used to group items by the appropriate characteristic. Still other more complex methods may be used to group items both by a first characteristic relevant to postal rates and a second characteristic not relevant to postal rates but otherwise relevant to fulfilling the customer order, for example a second characteristic based on grouping similar types of items.
Reference Burton does not explicitly show “logistics”, “priority” and “determining the logistics product with the priority level which meets the target condition” as is discussed in the claim limitations above. Reference Young shows “logistics”, “priority” and “determining the logistics product with the priority level which meets the target condition” ((col. 11, lines 50-66: 39) As illustrated in FIG. 5, a packaging information system may in some embodiments include an upstream fulfillment planning engine 510, configured to determine the facility or facilities to which an item group or complete customer order should be directed. As described above, a fulfillment planning engine 510 may in some embodiments be configured to determine whether or not a single fulfillment facility is able to provide all of the items in an order, and may pass subsets of a customer order to the smallest number of fulfillment facilities that may supply the required items. In other embodiments, fulfillment planning engine 510 may be configured to divide a customer order into multiple item groups dependent on other parameters, including, but not limited to, a service level agreement, the location of one or more facilities with respect to a destination, customer and/or order priorities (e.g., premium customer service or premium shipping considerations), specialty transportation service availability, or specialty services capability (e.g., gift wrapping or export services). Col. 12, lines 1-20: Fulfillment planning engine 510 may provide item data 515 for one or more items of one or more customer orders to be fulfilled, to one or more shipping consolidation analyzers 520 (e.g., to a shipping consolidation analyzer 520 in each of two or more target facility or to one or more centrally located shipping consolidation analyzers 520 on behalf of one or more target facilities). For instance, fulfillment planning engine 510 may be integrated with an e-commerce portal configured to receive customer orders for one or more items; the fulfillment planning engine may provide indications of such items to one or more shipping consolidation analyzers for fulfillment. In some embodiments, shipping consolidation analyzer 520 may provide feedback to fulfillment planning engine 510 (e.g., feedback indicating the results of shipment consolidation analysis, the configuration of a target facility, the capabilities and available services of a target facility, the available containers of a target facility, etc.). In the example illustrated in FIG. 5, fulfillment planning engine 510 may also provide item group data 515 to data store 500 for storage and/or future analysis (not shown). Col. 13, lines 34-57: For example, a user may request one or more reports regarding the number or percentage of item groups consolidated, the number or average number of items in each shipment set, the number or percentage of item groups requiring exception handling for shipment consolidation, the number or percentage of item groups shipped as whole or partial palettes, or the performance of the overall packaging operation in terms of speed, rework, or meeting transportation schedules. In some embodiments, trends of each of these metrics may be reported and/or analyzed in order to identify opportunities to improve the shipment consolidation method and/or the configuration of a given materials handling facility. For example, if one of these metrics changes by a given percentage (up or down), the shipment consolidation analyzer may be configured to flag the change and/or to trigger a review of the performance of the packaging information system or the operation of a given facility. Col. 13, lines 58-67, col. 14, lines 1-10: While the embodiment illustrated by FIG. 5 includes a fulfillment planning engine 510, a shipment consolidation analyzer 520, and a container recommender 540 that are separate components of a system configured to manage packing/shipping operations in a materials handling facility on behalf of an order fulfillment operation, in other embodiments, the functionality described as being performed by each of these components may all be performed by sub-components of a single system component, or may be partitioned in other ways. For example, in one embodiment, container recommender 540 may be implemented as a module of a software application configured to implement shipment consolidation analyzer 520. In another example, data store 500 may be located in a memory of the same computing node or of a different computing node than a memory that includes program instructions configured to implement a packaging information system, fulfillment planning engine 510, shipment consolidation analyzer 520 and/or container recommended 540. Col. 15, lines 14-24: A shipping consolidation analyzer may be further described using the following example. In this example, an e-commerce organization sells items of various types that can be shipped to customers, and a customer may place an order for an arbitrary quantity of each of any number of different items. A customer order may be provided to a materials handling facility intact (e.g., containing all of the items in a given customer order) or may be divided into two or more item groups by a fulfillment planning engine, as described herein. FIGS. 6A-6C illustrate various groupings of items in one such item group, according to one embodiment. Reference Young also shows “target store” col. 7, lines 27-42: A packaging information system, including a shipping consolidation analyzer, as described herein in various embodiments, may be utilized in a number of different facilities and situations, including, but not limited to materials handling facilities, order fulfillment centers, rental centers, distribution centers, packaging facilities, shipping facilities, libraries, museums, warehouse storage facilities, and the like. Note that the arrangement and order of operations illustrated by FIG. 1 is merely one example of many possible embodiments of the operation of an order fulfillment facility utilizing a packaging information system or stand-alone shipping consolidation analyzer. Other types of materials handling, manufacturing, or order fulfillment facilities suitable for application of a shipping consolidation analyzer may include different, fewer, or additional operations and resources, according to different embodiments. Reference Young also shows “priority levels” col. 11, lines 50-67: As illustrated in FIG. 5, a packaging information system may in some embodiments include an upstream fulfillment planning engine 510, configured to determine the facility or facilities to which an item group or complete customer order should be directed. As described above, a fulfillment planning engine 510 may in some embodiments be configured to determine whether or not a single fulfillment facility is able to provide all of the items in an order, and may pass subsets of a customer order to the smallest number of fulfillment facilities that may supply the required items. In other embodiments, fulfillment planning engine 510 may be configured to divide a customer order into multiple item groups dependent on other parameters, including, but not limited to, a service level agreement, the location of one or more facilities with respect to a destination, customer and/or order priorities (e.g., premium customer service or premium shipping considerations), specialty transportation service availability, or specialty services capability (e.g., gift wrapping or export services).
Reference Burton and Reference Young are analogous prior art to the claimed invention because the references generally relate to field of optimizing package mailing (Burton [0009]-[0011], Young col. 6, lines 46-67). Further, said references are part of the same classification, i.e., G06Q10. Lastly, said references are filed before the effective filing date of the instant application; hence, said references are analogous prior-art references.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this application for AIA to provide the teachings of Reference Young, particularly the computer readable medium (Young: col. 2, lines 31-63, Col. 5, lines 56-63), in the disclosure of Reference Burton, particularly in the computer and computer program products ([0029]-[0035], [0037], [0045]-[0050]: [0045]), in order to provide for a computer system that includes a computer readable medium as taught by Reference Young (see at least in col. 2, lines 31-63, Col. 5, lines 56-63), where upon the execution of the method and system of Reference Young for selectively applying an item sortation process may include a shipping consolidation analyzer, which may in various embodiments be implemented as a component of a packing information system. A packaging information system may include various components used to facilitate efficient and/or cost-effective operations in a materials handling facility (Young: col. 2, lines 33-41) so that the process of optimizing package mailing can be made more efficient and effective.
Further, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements in a similar optimizing package mailing field of endeavor, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that, given the existing technical ability to combine the elements as evidenced by Reference Burton in view of Reference Young, the results of the combination were predictable (MPEP 2143 A).
As per claims 7, 14, 15, 16, 17 and 18: Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Burton in view of Young shows:
further comprising:
pushing the mailing information of the target logistics product to a terminal used by the target user.
(Reference Burton shows [0031] With reference now to FIG. 4, a customer order data table 42 contained in database 36 is seen to include data relating to customer orders. Each customer order entry, that is each row of data, is seen to include an order identifier, customer information such as name, address and other related information, order information including the items and quantities of items ordered and order fulfillment information including the number of mailings and items in each mailing in the manner described below. [0038]: the front and back of mailer 48 (FIG. 6) is shown before the mailer is packaged for shipping. As shown, the front includes appropriate postage, a customer address and a notice to the customer, for example that the customer order has been shipped in multiple shipments. The back contains a bar code as further described below. [0039]: a first mailer 58A and an N.sup.th mailer 58N, the mailers together comprising a single customer order packaged as a plurality of sub-orders in the manner described below. The front of each mailer includes the information described in FIG. 7 above. The barcode on the back of each mailer is covered by stacked items as described below. Each mailer is shrink-wrapped in plastic for mailing in a selected national postage system or with a private mailing service.)
Response to Arguments
Applicants arguments are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection necessitated by the amendments made to the previously presented claims.
Applicant’s Argument #1
Applicants argue on page(s) 11-14 of applicants remarks that “According to the teaching of present claim 1, the method employs a multi-stage, criteria-based screening process that is deeply integrated with the physical infrastructure of a logistics network (via collection/delivery station information). This specific sequence of steps, particularly the use of station name information tied to physical locations and the final priority-based selection from a pre-processed set, provides a more accurate and efficient automated determination of an optimal logistics product. This solves the technical problems of inefficient resource use and poor recommendation accuracy in the related art by moving beyond mere mental steps or generic data sorting to a specific technological process that improves the functioning of the logistics product determination system itself. (See Paragraphs [0039] and [0041]).” (see applicants remarks for more details).
Response to Argument #1
Applicants' arguments have been fully considered; however, the examiner respectfully disagrees.
The claims are directed to certain methods of organizing human activity and merely use a computer to improve the performance of that determination—not the performance of a computer. (See MPEP 2106.05(a)(II)(i); A commonplace business method or mathematical algorithm being applied on a general-purpose computer, Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015)).
MPEP 2106.05f - Similarly, "claiming the improved speed or efficiency inherent with applying the abstract idea on a computer" does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide an inventive concept. Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Bank (USA), 792 F.3d 1363
MPEP 2106.05(f) iii. A process for monitoring audit log data that is executed on a general-purpose computer where the increased speed in the process comes solely from the capabilities of the general-purpose computer, FairWarning IP, LLC v. Iatric Sys., 839 F.3d 1089, 1095, 120 USPQ2d 1293, 1296 (Fed. Cir. 2016).
Additional elements are considered more than "apply it" or are not "mere instructions" when the claim recites a technological solution to a technological problem. In DDR Holdings, the court found that the additional elements did amount to more than merely instructing that the abstract idea should be applied on the Internet. DDR Holdings, LLC v. Hotels.com, L.P., 773 F.3d 1245, 1259, 113 USPQ2d 1097, 1107 (Fed. Cir. 2014). The claims at issue specified how interactions with the Internet were manipulated to yield a desired result—a result that overrode the routine and conventional sequence of events ordinarily triggered by the click of a hyperlink. 773 F.3d at 1258; 113 USPQ2d at 1106. In BASCOM, the court determined that the claimed combination of limitations did not simply recite an instruction to apply the abstract idea of filtering content on the Internet. BASCOM Global Internet Servs. v. AT&T Mobility, LLC, 827 F.3d 1341, 1350, 119 USPQ2d 1236, 1243 (Fed. Cir. 2016). Instead, the claim recited a "technology based solution" of filtering content on the Internet that overcome the disadvantages of prior art filtering systems. 827 F.3d at 1350-51, 119 USPQ2d at 1243. Finally, in Thales Visionix, the particular configuration of inertial sensors and the particular method of using the raw data from the sensors was more than simply applying a law of nature. Thales Visionix, Inc. v. United States, 850 F.3d 1343, 1348-49, 121 USPQ2d 1898, 1902 (Fed. Cir. 2017). The court found that the claims provided a system and method that "eliminate[d] many ‘complications’ inherent in previous solutions for determining position and orientation of an object on a moving platform." In other words, the claim recited a technological solution to a technological problem. Id.
For example, a mere data gathering such as a step of obtaining information about credit card transactions so that the information can be analyzed in order to detect whether the transactions were fraudulent. See MPEP 2106.05(g) for more information concerning insignificant extra-solution activity, including a discussion of the exemplar provided herein, which is based on CyberSource, 654 F.3d at 1375. See also Mayo, 566 U.S. at 79 (concluding that additional element of measuring metabolites of a drug administered to a patient was insignificant extra-solution activity, which was insufficient to confer patent eligibility); Flook, 437 U.S. at 590 (step of adjusting an alarm limit based on the output of a mathematical formula was ‘‘postsolution activity’’ and did not render method patent eligible).
For example, a claim describing how the abstract idea of hedging could be used in the commodities and energy markets, or a claim limiting the use of a mathematical formula to the petrochemical and oil-refining fields. See MPEP 2106.05(h) concerning generally linking use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use, including a discussion of the exemplars provided herein, which are based on Bilski, 561 U.S. at 612, and Flook, 437 U.S. at 588–90. Thus, the mere application of an abstract method of organizing human activity in a particular field is not sufficient to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
NPL Reference:
Z. Zhang, J. Ruan, X. Liu, J. Wang, P. Wang and X. Wang, "Logistics information systems model designing," World Automation Congress 2012, Puerto Vallarta, Mexico, 2012, pp. 1-4.
The article analyzed the primary functions of modern logistics and the operation demand of information systems. After studying the basic principles of the transport system planning, system theory and control theory, it puts forward a program, which using a multi-level hierarchical control as the oriented control work and a feedback control for the auxiliary controls. We make give users a high-quality service in the whole program as the core in the system design idea. The overall design model of the logistics information system was founded, and the article puts forward to the design models of the information flat of the logistics systems and the control system of aptitude vehicle, the analysis way and design models are useful for the logistics information systems. So we can use them to give some advice to the developing from tradition freight to modern logistics.Foreign Reference:
(CN 109389270 A) Wang et al. A Logistics Object Determining Method, Device And Machine Readable Medium. The invention claims a logistics object determining method, device and machine readable medium, relating to technical field of logistics. the method, comprising: providing a plurality of logistics object determining mode, the plurality of logistics object determining model corresponding to the sending level, sending information for obtaining target flow, current level determining the target flow, determining the target logistics object corresponding to the current level determining model, using the target logistics object determining model determining logistics object corresponding to the dispatch information. the existing method wastes time and energy when the determining logistics object, sorting the mistake possibility is high, easy to influence the delivery efficiency. obtaining can aim at different level of accurate prediction which is responsible for shipping logistics package should be dispatched to the logistics object, reduces the time and energy consumption, increases sorting efficiency and accuracy advantages.
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 NANCY PRASAD whose telephone number is (571)270-3265. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8:00 AM - 4:30 PM 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, Patricia Munson can be reached at (571)270-5396. 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.
/N.N.P/Examiner, Art Unit 3624
/PATRICIA H MUNSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3624