DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Status
Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/29/2024 has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 14,
Line 5 recites, “based on the security credentials, providing access to at least one of ( ”. The claim fails to recite that to which access is provided.
Claims 15 is rejected to, based upon it dependency on rejected base claim 14.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1, 9, 11 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HILAIRE (US 2024/0054833) in view of BERGMANN (US 2024/0242170).
Regarding independent claims 1, 11 and 16,
HILAIRE teaches a system for remote retrieval and insertion of contents from/within user-specific secured containers, the system comprising:
a user-specific secured container physically located in a secured area ([0017] teaches one or more secure areas including a key-box, vault, or lock boxes; and [0070] teaches that the vaults and lockboxes may possess physical keys that provide access to certain doors, cabinets, or drawers at a location); and
a user interface apparatus ([0027] teaches mobile devices; [0044] teaches using the mobile device to request secure access) including:
a receptacle configured to (i) receive first physical items from a user for storage in the user-specific secured container and (ii) deliver second physical items to the user that have been retrieved from the user-specific secured container, wherein the user-specific secured container is co-located with the user interface apparatus (at least [0017] and [0026] teach a receptacle for receiving and delivering items, though through its teaching of "secured areas," "key-boxes," and "vaults." Receptacles such as a "key-box," "vault," "lock boxes," or "cabinet/drawer" correspond to physical structures designed to hold items securely. Hilaire teach that the system is designed to "digitally catalog" what was "provided or given/removed" from the secure vault or lockbox, therefore teaching the core function of a delivery and receipt receptacle. Furthermore, the use of terms like "lock boxes" and "vaults" in the context of a "communication system" for "personnel" correspond to structures as physical receptacles for items); and
a first computing platform including a first memory ([0037] teaches a computer server and home agent coupled to a database memory that maintains log records for the communication system), one or more first computing device processors in communication with the first memory ([0038] teaches that the system has a first processing unit associated with the computer server on the home network, the first processing unit being coupled to the home agent and the first processing unit analyzing communications received from the one or more mobile units) and a display in communication with at least one of the one or more computing processor devices (see mobile screen in figs 2(a)-(c)), wherein the memory stores a user interface application configured to:
receive, from a user, user credentials that are associated with (ii) security credentials for accessing at least one of (a) the secured area and (b) the user-specific secured container ([0004] teaches that institutions, such as banks and banking locations, restrict access to sensitive areas at the bank or banking location. The sensitive areas at a banking facility may include areas were money, financial papers, sensitive information, or other valuable items are securely maintained. Authorized personnel may be granted physical keys or combination information so they may gain access to appropriate sensitive areas at the banking location. Oftentimes, the authorized personnel must authenticate their identity or their authorized status before being granted keys or combinations, or alternatively, prior to being allowed to access the sensitive area),
validate the user credentials to authenticate the user ([0069] teaches authentication and verification of the mobile users), and
in response to validating the user credentials, provide, via the display, user interfaces configured to allow the user to perform at least one of (i) add one or more first physical items to the user-specific secured container by placing the one or more first physical items in the receptacle, and (ii) receive, via the receptacle, delivery of one or more second physical items from the user-specific secured container ([0033] teaches that the system provides an option to unlock/allow access to secure vaults and/or lockboxes while simultaneously documenting the access details (“who, what, when”) with time stamps and identity verification (this may work in conjunction with a smart/IoT lock installed on a vault); [0045] teaches that for dual person authentication, digital log events require input by the requesting user and input by a co-signee in order to grant access to secure areas such as a vault, or to issue keys, codes or combinations, to a receiving employee or user.)
HILAIRE fails to expressly teach that the user interface application is configured to receive, from a user, user credentials that are associated with (i) an identifier of the user-specific secured container.
BERGMANN teaches a system for remote retrieval and insertion of contents from/within user-specific secured containers, the system comprising:
a user-specific secured container physically located in a secured area ([0037] teaches a storage locker or container where the undeliverable package can be received within a secured area, such as within a gated or fenced-in area);
a user interface apparatus including: a receptacle configured to (i) receive first physical items from a user for storage in the user-specific secured container ([0037] teaches that the user interface 600 may further include an access code 606 that may be used by the delivery driver to access a storage locker or other container where the undeliverable package will be received at the selected retail store) and (ii) deliver second physical items to the user that have been retrieved from the user-specific secured container, wherein the user-specific secured container is co-located with the user interface apparatus;
the user interface being configured to receive, from a user, user credentials that are associated with (i) an identifier of the user-specific secured container ([0021] teaches that the user interface may present instructions for completing the return including details regarding the precise return location (e.g., storage locker number); and an access code, such as a scannable barcode, may be presented on the user interface and used by the individual (see "delivery driver") to access the return location, such as the storage locker; [0037] teaches that a person (see "delivery driver") may present at least one access code to open the storage locker or container) and (ii) security credentials for accessing at least one of (a) the secured area and (b) the user-specific secured container ([0037] teaches that a person (see "delivery driver") may be presented with two access codes: one to access the secured area where the storage locker or container is located and one to open the storage locker or container).
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to modify the Hilaire system per the teachings of Bergmann, such that the system must receive, from a user, user credentials that are associated with (i) an identifier of the user-specific secured container, for the purpose of ensuring that a user cannot intentionally or accidentally open a neighboring container.
Regarding claim 9,
Hilaire teaches the user-specific secured container is safe deposit box and the secured area is a vault including a plurality of safe deposit boxes ([0030] teaches that the system pertains to activities and actions, such as opening/locking vault and lockbox doors, based on the entry of appropriate keys, codes and/or combinations required by the system; [0055] teaches a safe deposit vault 404).
Claim(s) 2-4, 10, 12-15 and 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HILAIRE (US 2024/0054833) in view of BERGMANN (US 2024/0242170) as applied to claims 1, 11 and 16, and further in view of SCHLER (US 2023/0159286) in view of GALLAUDET (US Patent 11,010,903).
Regarding claims 2, 12 and 17,
The combined teachings of Hilaire and Bergmann teach the features of 1, 11 and 16, but fails to further teach the features of claims 2, 12 and 17.
SCHLER teaches a package delivery system ([0050]) comprising a robotic sub-system including a robotic mechanism and a second computing platform having a second memory and one or more second computing device processors in communication with the second memory, wherein the second memory stores physical item retrieval and delivery engine ([0073] and [0076] teach that a package delivery system 10 may include a delivery handling device 94 which may be a robot and/or self-propelled device that may be used to obtain, carry, move, and/or house one or more packages 92 that have been delivered via the door access panel 14; [0132] teaches that a controller 36, or processing module, can be implemented via a single processing device or a plurality of processing devices. Such processing devices can include a microprocessor or the like, and/or any device that manipulates signals (analog and/or digital) based on operational instructions that are stored in a memory, such as memory) configured to:
receive (i) the identifier of the user-specific secured container, and (ii) the security credentials ([0061] teaches that the package delivery door system 10 may also include user interface 50 connected to the controller 36 -user interface 50 may be provided by the touchscreen 52 or digital keypad 53 that allows for the motor 34 to be activated by entry of a unique code. Said code being selectable by the owner of the dwelling where the package is to be delivered), and
based on the security credentials, provide access to at least one of (a) the secured area, and (b) the user-specific secured container ([0064] teaches a camera 54 used to identify a delivery person and provide them access to deliver a package upon having been approved by the authorized user -who may transmit a signal to the controller 36 which will activate the motor 34 to move the delivery panel 14 from the closed position to the opened position; [0067] alternatively teaches that after identifying that the motion at the door 12 is from a delivery person, the authorized user may either provide a unique code to the delivery person that the delivery person can enter into the keypad 53 to move the delivery panel 14 between the closed position and the opened position.) .
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to further modify the Hilaire system per the teachings of SCHLER -integrating a robotic arm into the security system described in Hilaire, for the purpose of providing a system which automatically handles secured containers based on real-time verification in a manner which strengthens the chain of custody by minimizing human contact. Such automation would also allow for 24/7 operation, as well as long term reductions in labor costs.
SCHLER fails to further teach that based on the identifier of the user-specific secured container, implement the robotics mechanism to remove from the receptacle one or more first physical items and deliver the one or more first physical items to the user-specific secured container.
GALLAUDET teaches a system which allows for system tracking, wherein a robotic sub-system including a robotic mechanism and a second computing platform having a second memory and one or more second computing device processors in communication with the second memory, wherein the second memory stores physical item retrieval and delivery engine (col. 2:57-63 teaches mobile drive units 112 which are independent, self-powered robotic devices that may move freely about the warehouse, under their own direction or through coordination by the management module 110; col. 3:41-46 teaches a robotic picking arm 128 which can be configured with one or more suction device end effectors for use in picking up items from the inventory holders 114); and
based on the identifier of the user-specific secured container, implement the robotics mechanism to remove from the receptacle one or more first physical items and deliver the one or more first physical items to the user-specific secured container (col. 8:37-43 teaches an instance wherein the item 370 has been ordered by a customer, the information on where the item 370 is stored (i.e., within the storage bin 360, in the depicted example) could be used to instruct an entity (e.g., a second associate, a robotic item picking device, etc.) involved in the fulfillment of the customer's order on where to retrieve the item 370 from. )
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to further modify the teachings of Hilaire, Bergmann and Schler as suggested by Gallaudet- thereby providing an end-to-end automated system which enables the robotic mechanism to identify, remove, and deliver items from a secure receptacle based on a specific container identifier, for the purpose of replacing manual methods, as manual methods are more prone to errors and delays. Such and end-to-end automated system would also better ensure that sensitive items remain within a controlled, recorded environment at all times.
Regarding claims 3 and 19,
Gallaudet teaches that the physical item retrieval and delivery engine is further configured to: receive (iii) user instructions provided by the user interface application to retrieve (a) at least a portion of the user-specific secured container or (b) one or more specified second physical items from the user-specific secured container ( in claim 16, Gallaudet teaches a retrieval process wherein the system provides a graphical user interface through which an input can be provided, the input specifying a location (see “bin”) of the plurality of locations of the storage container into which the first item was placed),
based on the identifier of the user-specific secured container, implement the robotics mechanism to retrieve (a) the at least a portion of the user-specific secured container or (b) the one or more specified second physical items from the user-specific secured container and deliver (a) or (b) to the receptacle (in Gallaudet, col. 8:37-43 teaches an instance wherein the item 370 has been ordered by a customer, the information on where the item 370 is stored (i.e., within the storage bin 360, in the depicted example) could be used to instruct an entity (e.g., a second associate, a robotic item picking device, etc.) involved in the fulfillment of the customer's order on where to retrieve the item 370 from).
Regarding claims 4, 13 and 18,
The combined disclosures of at least Gallaudet and Schler teach 18 the computer program product of claim 17, wherein the sets of codes further cause the one or more computing devices to:
receive, at the user interface apparatus, a first user input that comprises a first identifier for each of the one or more first physical items being added to the user-specific secure container ([0056] of Schler teaches a scanning unit 70 may be coupled to the controller 36 and includes detectors 72 configured to scan packages delivered through the passageway 15 for determining package parameters including package contents, dimensions, quantities, temperature, warnings, and/or sender information);
capture, via an image-capturing device in communication with the robotics mechanism ([0073] teaches that the handling device 94 may be a robot and/or self-propelled device that may be used to obtain, carry, move, and/or house one or more packages 92 that have been delivered via the door access panel 14), one or more images of each of the one or more first physical items to be added to the user-specific secure container ([0063] teaches a camera 54 to capture images or video; [0083] teaches that camera 54 may be positioned within the first housing 100 that may be attached to the delivery access panel 14); and
store the one or more images in a database according to the first identifier of a corresponding first physical item (Gallaudet teaches in claim 8, a memory containing computer program code that, when executed by operation of the one or more computer processors, performs an operation comprising: receiving two or more instances of digital video data captured using the two or more camera devices).
Regarding claim 10,
Gallaudet teaches that the secured area is warehouse including a plurality of user-specific secured container (col. 1:1-2 teaches a system pertaining to modern inventory systems, such as those in mail-order warehouses).
Regarding claim 14,
As best understood, with regard to the USC 112 second paragraph rejection above, the combined prior art references are considered to teach “The computer-implemented method of claim 13, further comprising: receiving, at the user interface apparatus, user instructions to retrieve (a) at least a portion of the user-specific secured container or (b) one or more specified second physical items from the user-specific secured container;
based on the security credentials, providing access to at least one of (
based on the identifier, implementing a robotics mechanism to retrieve (a) the secured area, and (b) the user-specific secured container; and a) the at least a portion of the user-specific secured container or (b) the one or more specified second physical items from the user-specific secured container and deliver (a) or (b) to the receptacle.”
Regarding claim 15,
As best understood, with regard to the USC 112 second paragraph rejection above, the combined prior art references are considered to teach, “The computer-implemented method of claim 14, further comprising: receiving, at the user interface apparatus, a second user input that comprises a second identifier for each of the one or more second physical items being retrieved from the user-specific secure container; accessing the database to determine whether at least one of the second identifiers matches one of the first identifiers; in response to determining that at least one of the second identifiers matches one of the first identifiers, instructing the image capturing device to scan the contents of the user-specific secure container; implementing image recognition techniques on the scanned contents to identify at least one second physical item based on the scanned contents including the cataloged image associated with the matching first identifier; and retrieving, via the robotics mechanism, the identified at least one second physical item from the user-specific secure container and delivering, via the robotics mechanism, the identified at least one second physical item to the receptacle.”
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HILAIRE (US 2024/0054833) in view of BERGMANN (US 2024/0242170) and further in view of MIRANDA (US 10,049,402).
Regarding claim 8,
The combined disclosures of Hilaire and Bergmann teach a system wherein the user interface application is configured to: receiving a user input that indicates a user selection of (i) adding the one or more first physical items to the user-specific secured container, or (ii) receiving delivery of the one or more second physical items from the user-specific secured container([0037] of Bergmann teaches that the user interface 600 may further include an access code 606 that may be used by the delivery driver to access a storage locker or other container where the package will be received), but fail to further teach that in response to receiving the user input, implementing a privacy glass to change at least one of a transparency or opacity of the display to generate a security region proximate the user interface apparatus.
MIRANDA teaches a system in response to receiving the user input, implementing a privacy glass to change at least one of a transparency or opacity of the display to generate a security region proximate the user interface apparatus (col. 2:17-24 and claim 1, teach applying, at the command of the current application module, a change in electrical current to the at least one glass panel, the change in electrical current being operable to decrease the transparency of the at least one transparent glass panel; and at least partially restricting, through the decreased transparency, the view of the automated teller machine through the at least one glass panel).
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to further modify the teachings of Hilaire and Bergmann, so as to include the use of privacy glass at the interface area for the purpose of creating a visual barrier, making it nearly impossible for onlookers to observe sensitive information.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-7 and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 5 and 20 are objected to because, the prior art of record fails to teach or suggest, the system of claims 4 and 19, further wherein,
the user interface application is further configured to receive a second user input that comprises a second identifier for each of the one or more second physical items being retrieved from the user-specific secure container,
the item retrieval and delivery engine is further configured to:
access the database to determine whether at least one of the second identifiers matches one of the first identifiers,
in response to determining that at least one of the second identifiers matches one of the first identifiers, instruct the image capturing device to scan the contents of the user-specific secure container and implement image recognition techniques on the scanned contents to identify at least one second physical item based on the scanned contents including the cataloged image associated with the matching first identifier, and, the robotics mechanism is further configured to retrieve the identified at least one second physical item from the user-specific secure container and deliver the identified at least one second physical item to the receptacle.
Claims 6 and 7 are objected to because of their dependency on objected to base-claim 5.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DIONNE PENDLETON whose telephone number is (571)272-7497. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9a-5pm.
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, Davetta Goins can be reached at 571-272-2957. 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.
/DIONNE PENDLETON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2689