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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments filed on 08/29/2025 with respect to claims 1, 3-10, 12-15, 17-20 and 22 have been fully considered but they are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection necessitated by Applicant’s amendment. New claims 24-25 will be addressed in this Office Action.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the claims at issue are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Instant Application
Patent No. 11,875,389
(Claim 1)
1. (Currently amended) A method implemented by a robotic assistant, the method comprising: receiving an item in a compartment; collecting at least one measurement of the item using a sensor associated with the compartment; determining an identity of the item based on the at least one measurement of the item; generating a posting for the item that includes a description of the item based on the identity of the item; determining dimensions for constructing a customized package for the item based on the at least one measurement of the item; identifying a material for constructing the customized package for the item based on the identity of the item and the dimensions; and constructing the customized package by folding a portion of the material based on the dimensions using a robotic arm inside the compartment.
(Claim 3)
3. (Original) The method of claim 1, further comprising determining whether the item is fragile based on rates of damage for other items associated with the identity of the item.
(Claim 4)
4. (Previously Presented) The method of claim 3, further comprising identifying the material for constructing the customized package in response to determining that the item is fragile.
(Claim 5)
5. (Original) The method of claim 1, further comprising generating an indication that the item is fragile for inclusion in the posting for the item or on the customized package for the item.
(Claim 6)
6. (Original) The method of claim 1, wherein the at least one measurement specifies a weight of the item or a size of the item.
(Claim 7)
7. (Original) The method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving a request to deliver the item to a defined location; and moving the compartment to the defined location to deliver the item in response to the request to deliver the item.
(Claim 8)
8. (Currently amended) A system comprising: a compartment to receive an item; a sensor associated with the compartment to collect at least one measurement of the item; and a processing device coupled to a memory component and associated with the compartment, the processing device to perform operations including: determining an identity of the item based on the at least one measurement of the item; generating a posting for the item that includes a description of the item based on the identity of the item; determining dimensions for constructing a customized package for the item based on the at least one measurement of the item; identifying a material for constructing the customized package for the item based on the identity of the item and the dimensions; and constructing the customized package by folding a portion of the material based on the dimensions using a robotic arm inside the compartment.
(Claim 9)
9. (Original) The system of claim 8, wherein the compartment is configured to store the item until the processing device receives an indication that the item is sold.
(Claim 10)
10. (Original) The system of claim 8, wherein the compartment is configured to transport the item.
(Claim 12)
12. (Original) The system of claim 8, further comprising determining whether the item is fragile based on rates of damage for other items of the identity of the item.
(Claim 13)
13. (Previously Presented) The system of claim 12, further comprising identifying the material for constructing the customized package in response to determining that the item is fragile.
(Claim 14)
14. (Original) The system of claim 8, further comprising generating an indication that the item is fragile for inclusion in the posting for the item or on the customized package for the item.
(Claim 15)
15. (Currently amended) A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having computer-executable instructions stored thereupon which, when executed by a processor of a computing device, cause the computing device to: receive an item in a compartment; collect at least one measurement of the item using a sensor associated with the compartment; determine an identity of the item based on the at least one measurement of the item; generate a posting for the item that includes a description of the item based on the identity of the item; determine dimensions for constructing a customized package for the item based on the at least one measurement of the item; identifying a material for constructing the customized package for the item based on the identity of the item and the dimensions; and constructing the customized package by folding a portion of the material based on the dimensions using a robotic arm inside the compartment.
(Claim 17)
17. (Previously Presented) The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 15, further configured to cause the computing device to determine whether the item is fragile based on rates of damage for other items of the identity of the item.
(Claim 18)
18. (Previously Presented) The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 17, further configured to cause the computing device to identify the material for constructing the customized package in response to determining that the item is fragile.
(Claim 19)
19. (Previously Presented) The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 15, further configured to cause the computing device to generate an indication that the item is fragile for inclusion in the posting for the item or on the customized package for the item.
(Claim 20)
20. (Previously Presented) The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 19, further configured to cause the computing device to: receive a request to deliver the item to a defined location; and cause the compartment to move to the defined location to deliver the item in response to the request to deliver the item.
(Claim 22)
22. (Previously Presented) The method of claim 1, wherein collecting the at least one measurement of the item involves capturing images from multiple angles in conjunction with an item manipulation arm within the compartment that holds the item at different angles in relation to one or more cameras.
(Claim 24)
24. (New) The method of claim 1, wherein the customized package is based on a three dimensional model of the item formed from the at least one measurement of the item.
(Claim 25)
25. (New) The method of claim 1, further comprising identifying the material for constructing the customized package for the item based on weight of the item.
(Claim 1)
1. A method implemented by a robotic assistant, the method comprising: receiving an item in a posting compartment; identifying the item with one or more image-based sensors; retrieving supplemental information about the item, wherein the supplemental information can identify a size and shape of the item and at least one performance specification; generating image data of the item from one or more cameras, wherein an angle, zoom level, and a distance of the one or more cameras in relation to the item to generate the image data are based on the size and the shape of the item; and generating a posting for the item, the posting comprising the image data and the supplemental information.
(Claim 2)
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the supplemental information is retrieved based on an identifier encoded in a barcode on the item.
(Claim 3)
3. The method of claim 1, wherein the posting compartment includes a turntable on which the item is placed, and wherein the one or more cameras take pictures of the item from different perspectives as the turntable rotates the item.
(Claim 4)
4. The method of claim 1, wherein a laser distance measure determines at least one of the size or the shape of the item as a turntable rotates the item.
(Claim 5)
5. The method of claim 1, wherein a customized package is created to ship the item in based on the size or the shape of the item.
(Claim 6)
6. The method of claim 1, wherein a laser distance measure attached to a gimbal is moved in three dimensions around the item to measure a second size of the item, and wherein the size of the item and the second size of the item are compared to verify an accuracy of the posting.
(Claim 7)
7. The method of claim 1, further comprising: autonomously plugging a communication cable into the item; retrieving additional supplemental information about the item over the communication cable; and including the additional supplemental information about the item in the posting.
(Claim 1)
1. A method implemented by a robotic assistant, the method comprising: receiving an item in a posting compartment; identifying the item with one or more image-based sensors; retrieving supplemental information about the item, wherein the supplemental information can identify a size and shape of the item and at least one performance specification; generating image data of the item from one or more cameras, wherein an angle, zoom level, and a distance of the one or more cameras in relation to the item to generate the image data are based on the size and the shape of the item; and generating a posting for the item, the posting comprising the image data and the supplemental information.
(Claim 2)
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the supplemental information is retrieved based on an identifier encoded in a barcode on the item.
(Claim 3)
3. The method of claim 1, wherein the posting compartment includes a turntable on which the item is placed, and wherein the one or more cameras take pictures of the item from different perspectives as the turntable rotates the item.
(Claim 4)
4. The method of claim 1, wherein a laser distance measure determines at least one of the size or the shape of the item as a turntable rotates the item.
(Claim 5)
5. The method of claim 1, wherein a customized package is created to ship the item in based on the size or the shape of the item.
(Claim 6)
6. The method of claim 1, wherein a laser distance measure attached to a gimbal is moved in three dimensions around the item to measure a second size of the item, and wherein the size of the item and the second size of the item are compared to verify an accuracy of the posting.
(Claim 7)
7. The method of claim 1, further comprising: autonomously plugging a communication cable into the item; retrieving additional supplemental information about the item over the communication cable; and including the additional supplemental information about the item in the posting.
(Claim 1)
1. A method implemented by a robotic assistant, the method comprising: receiving an item in a posting compartment; identifying the item with one or more image-based sensors; retrieving supplemental information about the item, wherein the supplemental information can identify a size and shape of the item and at least one performance specification; generating image data of the item from one or more cameras, wherein an angle, zoom level, and a distance of the one or more cameras in relation to the item to generate the image data are based on the size and the shape of the item; and generating a posting for the item, the posting comprising the image data and the supplemental information.
(Claim 2)
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the supplemental information is retrieved based on an identifier encoded in a barcode on the item.
(Claim 3)
3. The method of claim 1, wherein the posting compartment includes a turntable on which the item is placed, and wherein the one or more cameras take pictures of the item from different perspectives as the turntable rotates the item.
(Claim 4)
4. The method of claim 1, wherein a laser distance measure determines at least one of the size or the shape of the item as a turntable rotates the item.
(Claim 5)
5. The method of claim 1, wherein a customized package is created to ship the item in based on the size or the shape of the item.
(Claim 6)
6. The method of claim 1, wherein a laser distance measure attached to a gimbal is moved in three dimensions around the item to measure a second size of the item, and wherein the size of the item and the second size of the item are compared to verify an accuracy of the posting.
(Claim 7)
7. The method of claim 1, further comprising: autonomously plugging a communication cable into the item; retrieving additional supplemental information about the item over the communication cable; and including the additional supplemental information about the item in the posting.
Claims 1, 6-8, 10, 15, 20, 24 and 25 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-7 of Patent No. US 11,875,389, and further in view of HEINLA (WO 2018/099930), and further in view of Linnell et al. (US 2018/0297266 A1).
Re claim 1, claim 1 of the Patent No. 11,875,389, recites each and every limitation of claim 1 of the Instant Application except for the limitation of “collecting at least one measurement of the item using a sensor associated with the compartment; determining an identity of the item based on the at least one measurement of the item;
determining dimensions for constructing a customized package for the item based on the at least one measurement of the item; identifying a material for constructing the customized package for the item based on the identity of the item and the dimensions; and constructing the customized package by folding a portion of the material based on the dimensions using a robotic arm inside the compartment.”
However, the reference of HEINLA explicitly teaches “collecting at least one measurement of the item using a sensor associated with the compartment” (see page 24 lines 21-28 for collecting at least one measurement of the item using a sensor associated with the compartment (i.e. package sensor 30 can be adapted to measure first data reflective of the presence or absence of each of a plurality of packages 20, 22 in the package space 10 as described in figs. 1-2 page 29 lines 1-3)); “determining an identity of the item based on the at least one measurement of the item” (see page 24 lines 21-29 for determining an identity of the item based on the at least one measurement of the item (i.e. package sensor 30 can be adapted to measure first data reflective of the presence or absence of each of a plurality of packages 20, 22 in the package space 10, and the identity of each such package 20, 22 by virtue of the package ID 32 such as a barcode, a QR code or a similar code and/or other specific package characteristic such as dimensions, weight, visual characteristics, RF tags and so on as described in figs. 1-2 page 29 lines 1-5)); “determining dimensions for constructing a customized package for the item based on the at least one measurement of the item” (see page 24 lines 21-29 for determining dimensions for constructing a customized package for the item based on the at least one measurement of the item (i.e. the packages 20, 22 are placed within the package space 10, they are schematically depicted in the figure as rectangular boxes, but can comprise any other shape, packages 20, 22 can comprise mail, documents, groceries, take-out, packages, and/or other items to be delivered as described in fig. 1 page 24 lines 28-32, furthermore, package sensor 30 can be adapted to measure first data reflective of the presence or absence of each of a plurality of packages 20, 22 in the package space 10, and the identity of each such package 20, 22 by virtue of the package ID 32 such as a barcode, a QR code or a similar code and/or other specific package characteristic such as dimensions, weight, visual characteristics, RF tags and so on as described in figs. 1-2 page 29 lines 1-5). Thus, since package sensor 30 can be adapted to measure first data reflective of the presence or absence of each of a plurality of packages 20, 22 in the package space 10 and the identity of each such package 20, 22 by virtue of specific package characteristic such as dimensions, construction of each customized package 20, 22 has to include the determined dimensions)
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate this feature (measurement) taught by HEINLA into the method recited by claim 1 of Patent No. 11,875,389.
One skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the feature as taught by HEINLA above into the method recited in claim 1 of Patent No. 11,875,389 for the benefit of having a mobile robot that can further comprise at least one package sensor adapted to at least measure first data reflective of the presence or absence of at least one package, wherein the mobile robot can also comprise at least one processing component adapted to at least receive the package sensor's first data and process it, wherein the mobile robot can further comprise at least one communication component adapted to at least send and receive second data, wherein the package sensor can be adapted to measure first data relating to the package removed from the package space and/or first data relating to the packages within the package space, wherein the package sensor can be adapted to measure first data reflective of the presence or absence of each of a plurality of packages in the package space in order to ease the processing time when measuring first data reflective of the presence or absence of each of a plurality of packages in the package space (see page 4 lines 4-14 to lines 25-29)
On the other hand, the reference of Linnell explicitly teaches “identifying a material for constructing the customized package for the item based on the identity of the item and the dimensions” (see ¶ 70 for identifying a material for constructing the customized package for the item based on the identity of the item and the dimensions (i.e. the item data includes various characteristics for each item in the catalog, for example, such characteristic data may include, but is not limited to, shape, size, weight, center of mass, shear strength, bending strength, compression strength, hardness/softness, solid/liquid, material composition, fragility, and value of an item as described in figs. 1-2 paragraph 43, furthermore, using the custom packaging specification 16, the automated packaging manufacturing system 150 makes one or more protective structures that are employed to position and protect the items i in one or more respective containers for shipping the order 02 as described in figs. 1-2 paragraph 50, moreover, the container parameter(s) indicate which of a plurality of potential containers is to be utilized by the automated packing system 140 for packing the one or more items i, the potential containers can have, for example, different materials, volumes, dimensions, shapes, and/or sealing mechanisms (e.g., tape, slots and tabs, adhesive, etc.), accordingly, the container parameters can indicate, for example, a type of container (e.g., a material, a thickness, a shape, a volume, dimensions, a sealing mechanism, a construction type, performance characteristics, etc.) and a quantity of containers for packaging the one or more items i according to the packaging specification 16 as described in figs. 1-2 paragraph 71)); “and constructing the customized package by folding a portion of the material based on the dimensions using a robotic arm inside the compartment” (see ¶s 70-71 for constructing the customized package by folding a portion of the material based on the dimensions using a robotic arm inside the compartment (i.e. the item data includes various characteristics for each item in the catalog, for example, such characteristic data may include, but is not limited to, shape, size, weight, center of mass, shear strength, bending strength, compression strength, hardness/softness, solid/liquid, material composition, fragility, and value of an item as described in figs. 1-2 paragraph 43, furthermore, using the custom packaging specification 16, the automated packaging manufacturing system 150 makes one or more protective structures that are employed to position and protect the items i in one or more respective containers for shipping the order 02 as described in figs. 1-2 paragraph 50, moreover, the protective structure 378A can be folded in half in a clamshell type manner to fully enclose the bottle as described in fig. 10 paragraph 162). Also, see figs. 6-9 paragraphs 144-145, 147, 153)
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate this feature (customized package) taught by Linnell into the method recited by claim 1 of Patent No. 11,875,389.
One skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the feature as taught by Linnell above into the method recited in claim 1 of Patent No. 11,875,389 for the benefit having an automated packaging manufacturing system 150 that produces one or more custom protective structures for receiving and positioning the items i in the container 370 according to the custom packaging specification 16, wherein the packaging optimization module 105 determines the custom packaging specification 16 after the order 2 is received, so that the custom packaging specification 16 can provide a more optimal packaging arrangement based on the actual combination 14 of items i in the order 2, correspondingly, the automated packaging manufacturing system 150 produces the one or more custom protective structures after the order 2 is received and when the custom packaging specification 16 is ready, wherein to provide prompt shipment of the order 2, manufacturing of the one or more custom protective structures is preferably completed by the time that the items i have been assembled and are ready for packing, in other words, rapid manufacturing of the one or more protective structures occurs while the items i are simultaneously retrieved from an inventory storage 110 and assembled at a packing location 141 in order to improve efficiency when producing one or more custom protective structures for receiving and positioning the items i in the container 370 according to the custom packaging specification 16 (see figs. 1-3 ¶ 147)
Re claim 6, claim 6 of the Patent No. 11,875,389, recites each and every limitation of claim 6 of the Instant Application except for the limitation of “wherein the at least one measurement specifies a weight of the item or a size of the item.”
However, the reference of HEINLA explicitly teaches “wherein the at least one measurement specifies a weight of the item or a size of the item” (see page 24 lines 21-29 for the at least one measurement specifies a weight of the item or a size of the item (i.e. package sensor 30 can be adapted to measure first data reflective of the presence or absence of each of a plurality of packages 20, 22 in the package space 10, and the identity of each such package 20, 22 by virtue of the package ID 32 such as a barcode, a QR code or a similar code and/or other specific package characteristic such as dimensions, weight, visual characteristics, RF tags and so on as described in figs. 1-2 page 29 lines 1-5))
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate this feature (measurement) taught by HEINLA into the method recited by claim 1 of Patent No. 11,875,389.
Per claim 6, Patent No. 11,875,389 and HEINLA are combined for the same motivation as set forth in claim 1 above.
Re claim 7, claim 7 of the Patent No. 11,875,389, recites each and every limitation of claim 7 of the Instant Application except for the limitation of “receiving a request to deliver the item to a defined location; and moving the compartment to the defined location to deliver the item in response to the request to deliver the item.”
However, the reference of HEINLA explicitly teaches “receiving a request to deliver the item to a defined location” (see page 9 lines 1-12 for receiving a request to deliver the item to a defined location (i.e. the delivery recipient can use the personal computing device to request the delivery by the robot, for example request delivery at a certain time and location as described in page 8 lines 29-31)); “and moving the compartment to the defined location to deliver the item in response to the request to deliver the item” (see page 9 lines 1-12 for moving the compartment to the defined location to deliver the item in response to the request to deliver the item (i.e. the remote terminal can detect that the robot has reached the desired delivery location and send the robot a command to unlock the electronic lock and/or to open the robot's lid, for example, the remote operator can observe that the robot approached a correct house at the delivery location and that a person is standing in front of said house, deducing that the person is the delivery recipient and sending the robot the command to provide access to the package space as described in page 9 lines 4-9). Also, see fig. 3 page 27 lines 33-35, page 28 lines 1-12)
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate this feature (request) taught by HEINLA into the method recited by claim 1 of Patent No. 11,875,389.
One skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the feature as taught by HEINLA above into the method recited in claim 1 of Patent No. 11,875,389 for the benefit of having a delivery recipient that can use the personal computing device to request the delivery by the robot, for example request delivery at a certain time and location in order to have a user friendly interaction (see page 8 lines 29-31)
Re claim 8, claim 1 of the Patent No. 11,875,389, recites each and every limitation of claim 8 of the Instant Application except for the limitation of “a sensor associated with the compartment to collect at least one measurement of the item; and a processing device coupled to a memory component and associated with the compartment, the processing device to perform operations including: determining an identity of the item based on the at least one measurement of the item; determining dimensions for constructing a customized package for the item based on the at least one measurement of the item; identifying a material for constructing the customized package for the item based on the identity of the item and the dimensions; and constructing the customized package by folding a portion of the material based on the dimensions using a robotic arm inside the compartment.”
However, the reference of HEINLA explicitly teaches “a sensor associated with the compartment to collect at least one measurement of the item” (see page 24 lines 21-28 for collecting at least one measurement of the item using a sensor associated with the compartment (i.e. package sensor 30 can be adapted to measure first data reflective of the presence or absence of each of a plurality of packages 20, 22 in the package space 10 as described in figs. 1-2 page 29 lines 1-3)); “and a processing device coupled to a memory component and associated with the compartment, the processing device to perform operations including” (i.e. the robot's processing component for further manipulation and/or storage as described in page 10 lines 30-32, furthermore, the robot's processing component, the processing component can comprise a system on a chip, a standard CPU and/or GPU or a combination thereof, a person skilled in the art will recognize that the robot can utilize a plurality of widely available processing components similar to the ones in personal computing devices (such as mobile phones, tablets and the like), and/or utilize a custom processing component better adapted to the robot's uses as described in page 12 lines 4-10). Also, see page 24 lines 21-26): “determining an identity of the item based on the at least one measurement of the item” (see page 24 lines 21-29 for determining an identity of the item based on the at least one measurement of the item (i.e. package sensor 30 can be adapted to measure first data reflective of the presence or absence of each of a plurality of packages 20, 22 in the package space 10, and the identity of each such package 20, 22 by virtue of the package ID 32 such as a barcode, a QR code or a similar code and/or other specific package characteristic such as dimensions, weight, visual characteristics, RF tags and so on as described in figs. 1-2 page 29 lines 1-5)); “determining dimensions for constructing a customized package for the item based on the at least one measurement of the item” (see page 24 lines 21-29 for determining dimensions for constructing a customized package for the item based on the at least one measurement of the item (i.e. the packages 20, 22 are placed within the package space 10, they are schematically depicted in the figure as rectangular boxes, but can comprise any other shape, packages 20, 22 can comprise mail, documents, groceries, take-out, packages, and/or other items to be delivered as described in fig. 1 page 24 lines 28-32, furthermore, package sensor 30 can be adapted to measure first data reflective of the presence or absence of each of a plurality of packages 20, 22 in the package space 10, and the identity of each such package 20, 22 by virtue of the package ID 32 such as a barcode, a QR code or a similar code and/or other specific package characteristic such as dimensions, weight, visual characteristics, RF tags and so on as described in figs. 1-2 page 29 lines 1-5). Thus, since package sensor 30 can be adapted to measure first data reflective of the presence or absence of each of a plurality of packages 20, 22 in the package space 10 and the identity of each such package 20, 22 by virtue of specific package characteristic such as dimensions, construction of each customized package 20, 22 has to include the determined dimensions)
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate this feature (measurement) taught by HEINLA into the method recited by claim 1 of Patent No. 11,875,389.
One skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the feature as taught by HEINLA above into the method recited in claim 1 of Patent No. 11,875,389 for the benefit of having a mobile robot that can further comprise at least one package sensor adapted to at least measure first data reflective of the presence or absence of at least one package, wherein the mobile robot can also comprise at least one processing component adapted to at least receive the package sensor's first data and process it, wherein the mobile robot can further comprise at least one communication component adapted to at least send and receive second data, wherein the package sensor can be adapted to measure first data relating to the package removed from the package space and/or first data relating to the packages within the package space, wherein the package sensor can be adapted to measure first data reflective of the presence or absence of each of a plurality of packages in the package space in order to ease the processing time when measuring first data reflective of the presence or absence of each of a plurality of packages in the package space (see page 4 lines 4-14 to lines 25-29)
On the other hand, the reference of Linnell explicitly teaches “identifying a material for constructing the customized package for the item based on the identity of the item and the dimensions” (see ¶ 70 for identifying a material for constructing the customized package for the item based on the identity of the item and the dimensions (i.e. the item data includes various characteristics for each item in the catalog, for example, such characteristic data may include, but is not limited to, shape, size, weight, center of mass, shear strength, bending strength, compression strength, hardness/softness, solid/liquid, material composition, fragility, and value of an item as described in figs. 1-2 paragraph 43, furthermore, using the custom packaging specification 16, the automated packaging manufacturing system 150 makes one or more protective structures that are employed to position and protect the items i in one or more respective containers for shipping the order 02 as described in figs. 1-2 paragraph 50, moreover, the container parameter(s) indicate which of a plurality of potential containers is to be utilized by the automated packing system 140 for packing the one or more items i, the potential containers can have, for example, different materials, volumes, dimensions, shapes, and/or sealing mechanisms (e.g., tape, slots and tabs, adhesive, etc.), accordingly, the container parameters can indicate, for example, a type of container (e.g., a material, a thickness, a shape, a volume, dimensions, a sealing mechanism, a construction type, performance characteristics, etc.) and a quantity of containers for packaging the one or more items i according to the packaging specification 16 as described in figs. 1-2 paragraph 71)); “and constructing the customized package by folding a portion of the material based on the dimensions using a robotic arm inside the compartment” (see ¶s 70-71 for constructing the customized package by folding a portion of the material based on the dimensions using a robotic arm inside the compartment (i.e. the item data includes various characteristics for each item in the catalog, for example, such characteristic data may include, but is not limited to, shape, size, weight, center of mass, shear strength, bending strength, compression strength, hardness/softness, solid/liquid, material composition, fragility, and value of an item as described in figs. 1-2 paragraph 43, furthermore, using the custom packaging specification 16, the automated packaging manufacturing system 150 makes one or more protective structures that are employed to position and protect the items i in one or more respective containers for shipping the order 02 as described in figs. 1-2 paragraph 50, moreover, the protective structure 378A can be folded in half in a clamshell type manner to fully enclose the bottle as described in fig. 10 paragraph 162). Also, see figs. 6-9 paragraphs 144-145, 147, 153)
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate this feature (customized package) taught by Linnell into the method recited by claim 1 of Patent No. 11,875,389.
One skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the feature as taught by Linnell above into the method recited in claim 1 of Patent No. 11,875,389 for the benefit having an automated packaging manufacturing system 150 that produces one or more custom protective structures for receiving and positioning the items i in the container 370 according to the custom packaging specification 16, wherein the packaging optimization module 105 determines the custom packaging specification 16 after the order 2 is received, so that the custom packaging specification 16 can provide a more optimal packaging arrangement based on the actual combination 14 of items i in the order 2, correspondingly, the automated packaging manufacturing system 150 produces the one or more custom protective structures after the order 2 is received and when the custom packaging specification 16 is ready, wherein to provide prompt shipment of the order 2, manufacturing of the one or more custom protective structures is preferably completed by the time that the items i have been assembled and are ready for packing, in other words, rapid manufacturing of the one or more protective structures occurs while the items i are simultaneously retrieved from an inventory storage 110 and assembled at a packing location 141 in order to improve efficiency when producing one or more custom protective structures for receiving and positioning the items i in the container 370 according to the custom packaging specification 16 (see figs. 1-3 ¶ 147)
Re claim 10, claim 1 of the Patent No. 11,875,389, recites each and every limitation of claim 10 of the Instant Application except for the limitation of “wherein the compartment is configured to transport the item.”
However, the reference of HEINLA explicitly teaches “wherein the compartment is configured to transport the item” (see page 24 lines 21-32 for the compartment is configured to transport the item (i.e. the packages 20, 22 are placed within the package space 10 as described in fig. 1 page 24 lines 28-29, furthermore, the remote terminal can detect that the robot has reached the desired delivery location as described in page 9 lines 4-5). Also, see fig. 3 page 27 lines 33-35, page 28 lines 1-12)
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate this feature (transport) taught by HEINLA into the method recited by claim 1 of Patent No. 11,875,389.
One skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the feature as taught by HEINLA above into the method recited in claim 1 of Patent No. 11,875,389 for the benefit of placing packages 20, 22 within the package space 10, wherein a remote terminal can detect that a robot has reached a desired delivery location in order to ease the processing time when detecting that the robot has reached the desired delivery location (see fig. 1 page 24 lines 28-29, page 9 lines 4-5)
Re claim 15, claim 1 of the Patent No. 11,875,389, recites each and every limitation of claim 15 of the Instant Application except for the limitation of “collect at least one measurement of the item using a sensor associated with the compartment; determine an identity of the item based on the at least one measurement of the item; determine dimensions for constructing a customized package for the item based on the at least one measurement of the item; identifying a material for constructing the customized package for the item based on the identity of the item and the dimensions; and constructing the customized package by folding a portion of the material based on the dimensions using a robotic arm inside the compartment.”
However, the reference of HEINLA explicitly teaches “collect at least one measurement of the item using a sensor associated with the compartment” (see page 24 lines 21-28 for collect at least one measurement of the item using a sensor associated with the compartment (i.e. package sensor 30 can be adapted to measure first data reflective of the presence or absence of each of a plurality of packages 20, 22 in the package space 10 as described in figs. 1-2 page 29 lines 1-3)); “determine an identity of the item based on the at least one measurement of the item” (see page 24 lines 21-29 for determine an identity of the item based on the at least one measurement of the item (i.e. package sensor 30 can be adapted to measure first data reflective of the presence or absence of each of a plurality of packages 20, 22 in the package space 10, and the identity of each such package 20, 22 by virtue of the package ID 32 such as a barcode, a QR code or a similar code and/or other specific package characteristic such as dimensions, weight, visual characteristics, RF tags and so on as described in figs. 1-2 page 29 lines 1-5)); “determine dimensions for constructing a customized package for the item based on the at least one measurement of the item” (see page 24 lines 21-29 for determine dimensions for constructing a customized package for the item based on the at least one measurement of the item (i.e. the packages 20, 22 are placed within the package space 10, they are schematically depicted in the figure as rectangular boxes, but can comprise any other shape, packages 20, 22 can comprise mail, documents, groceries, take-out, packages, and/or other items to be delivered as described in fig. 1 page 24 lines 28-32, furthermore, package sensor 30 can be adapted to measure first data reflective of the presence or absence of each of a plurality of packages 20, 22 in the package space 10, and the identity of each such package 20, 22 by virtue of the package ID 32 such as a barcode, a QR code or a similar code and/or other specific package characteristic such as dimensions, weight, visual characteristics, RF tags and so on as described in figs. 1-2 page 29 lines 1-5). Thus, since package sensor 30 can be adapted to measure first data reflective of the presence or absence of each of a plurality of packages 20, 22 in the package space 10 and the identity of each such package 20, 22 by virtue of specific package characteristic such as dimensions, construction of each customized package 20, 22 has to include the determined dimensions)
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate this feature (measurement) taught by HEINLA into the method recited by claim 1 of Patent No. 11,875,389.
One skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the feature as taught by HEINLA above into the method recited in claim 1 of Patent No. 11,875,389 for the benefit of having a mobile robot that can further comprise at least one package sensor adapted to at least measure first data reflective of the presence or absence of at least one package, wherein the mobile robot can also comprise at least one processing component adapted to at least receive the package sensor's first data and process it, wherein the mobile robot can further comprise at least one communication component adapted to at least send and receive second data, wherein the package sensor can be adapted to measure first data relating to the package removed from the package space and/or first data relating to the packages within the package space, wherein the package sensor can be adapted to measure first data reflective of the presence or absence of each of a plurality of packages in the package space in order to ease the processing time when measuring first data reflective of the presence or absence of each of a plurality of packages in the package space (see page 4 lines 4-14 to lines 25-29)
On the other hand, the reference of Linnell explicitly teaches “identifying a material for constructing the customized package for the item based on the identity of the item and the dimensions” (see ¶ 70 for identifying a material for constructing the customized package for the item based on the identity of the item and the dimensions (i.e. the item data includes various characteristics for each item in the catalog, for example, such characteristic data may include, but is not limited to, shape, size, weight, center of mass, shear strength, bending strength, compression strength, hardness/softness, solid/liquid, material composition, fragility, and value of an item as described in figs. 1-2 paragraph 43, furthermore, using the custom packaging specification 16, the automated packaging manufacturing system 150 makes one or more protective structures that are employed to position and protect the items i in one or more respective containers for shipping the order 02 as described in figs. 1-2 paragraph 50, moreover, the container parameter(s) indicate which of a plurality of potential containers is to be utilized by the automated packing system 140 for packing the one or more items i, the potential containers can have, for example, different materials, volumes, dimensions, shapes, and/or sealing mechanisms (e.g., tape, slots and tabs, adhesive, etc.), accordingly, the container parameters can indicate, for example, a type of container (e.g., a material, a thickness, a shape, a volume, dimensions, a sealing mechanism, a construction type, performance characteristics, etc.) and a quantity of containers for packaging the one or more items i according to the packaging specification 16 as described in figs. 1-2 paragraph 71)); “and constructing the customized package by folding a portion of the material based on the dimensions using a robotic arm inside the compartment” (see ¶s 70-71 for constructing the customized package by folding a portion of the material based on the dimensions using a robotic arm inside the compartment (i.e. the item data includes various characteristics for each item in the catalog, for example, such characteristic data may include, but is not limited to, shape, size, weight, center of mass, shear strength, bending strength, compression strength, hardness/softness, solid/liquid, material composition, fragility, and value of an item as described in figs. 1-2 paragraph 43, furthermore, using the custom packaging specification 16, the automated packaging manufacturing system 150 makes one or more protective structures that are employed to position and protect the items i in one or more respective containers for shipping the order 02 as described in figs. 1-2 paragraph 50, moreover, the protective structure 378A can be folded in half in a clamshell type manner to fully enclose the bottle as described in fig. 10 paragraph 162). Also, see figs. 6-9 paragraphs 144-145, 147, 153)
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate this feature (customized package) taught by Linnell into the method recited by claim 1 of Patent No. 11,875,389.
One skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the feature as taught by Linnell above into the method recited in claim 1 of Patent No. 11,875,389 for the benefit having an automated packaging manufacturing system 150 that produces one or more custom protective structures for receiving and positioning the items i in the container 370 according to the custom packaging specification 16, wherein the packaging optimization module 105 determines the custom packaging specification 16 after the order 2 is received, so that the custom packaging specification 16 can provide a more optimal packaging arrangement based on the actual combination 14 of items i in the order 2, correspondingly, the automated packaging manufacturing system 150 produces the one or more custom protective structures after the order 2 is received and when the custom packaging specification 16 is ready, wherein to provide prompt shipment of the order 2, manufacturing of the one or more custom protective structures is preferably completed by the time that the items i have been assembled and are ready for packing, in other words, rapid manufacturing of the one or more protective structures occurs while the items i are simultaneously retrieved from an inventory storage 110 and assembled at a packing location 141 in order to improve efficiency when producing one or more custom protective structures for receiving and positioning the items i in the container 370 according to the custom packaging specification 16 (see figs. 1-3 ¶ 147)
Re claim 20, Patent No. 11,875,389 and HEINLA as discussed in claims 7 and 15 above discloses all the claimed limitations of claim 20.
Re claim 24, claim 1 of the Patent No. 11,875,389, recites each and every limitation of claim 24 of the Instant Application except for the limitation of “wherein the customized package is based on a three dimensional model of the item formed from the at least one measurement of the item.”
However, the reference of Linnell explicitly teaches “wherein the customized package is based on a three dimensional model of the item formed from the at least one measurement of the item” (see ¶s 45, 77 for the customized package is based on a three dimensional model of the item formed from the at least one measurement of the item (i.e. a three-dimensional data model can be determined for each item i based on the characteristic data 14 relating to the size, shape and/or dimensions as described in figs. 1-3 paragraph 76))
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate this feature (customized package) taught by Linnell into the method recited by claim 1 of Patent No. 11,875,389.
One skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the feature as taught by Linnell above into the method recited in claim 1 of Patent No. 11,875,389 for the benefit having an automated packaging manufacturing system 150 that produces one or more custom protective structures for receiving and positioning the items i in the container 370 according to the custom packaging specification 16, wherein the packaging optimization module 105 determines the custom packaging specification 16 after the order 2 is received, so that the custom packaging specification 16 can provide a more optimal packaging arrangement based on the actual combination 14 of items i in the order 2, correspondingly, the automated packaging manufacturing system 150 produces the one or more custom protective structures after the order 2 is received and when the custom packaging specification 16 is ready, wherein to provide prompt shipment of the order 2, manufacturing of the one or more custom protective structures is preferably completed by the time that the items i have been assembled and are ready for packing, in other words, rapid manufacturing of the one or more protective structures occurs while the items i are simultaneously retrieved from an inventory storage 110 and assembled at a packing location 141 in order to improve efficiency when producing one or more custom protective structures for receiving and positioning the items i in the container 370 according to the custom packaging specification 16 (see figs. 1-3 ¶ 147)
Re claim 25, claim 1 of the Patent No. 11,875,389, recites each and every limitation of claim 25 of the Instant Application except for the limitation of “identifying the material for constructing the customized package for the item based on a weight of the item.”
However, the reference of Linnell explicitly teaches “identifying the material for constructing the customized package for the item based on a weight of the item” (see ¶ 45 for identifying the material for constructing the customized package for the item based on a weight of the item (i.e. the item data includes various characteristics for each item in the catalog, for example, such characteristic data may include, but is not limited to, shape, size, weight, center of mass, shear strength, bending strength, compression strength, hardness/softness, solid/liquid, material composition, fragility, and value of an item as described in figs. 1-2 paragraph 43, furthermore, using the custom packaging specification 16, the automated packaging manufacturing system 150 makes one or more protective structures that are employed to position and protect the items i in one or more respective containers for shipping the order 02 as described in figs. 1-2 paragraph 50, moreover, the container parameter(s) indicate which of a plurality of potential containers is to be utilized by the automated packing system 140 for packing the one or more items i, the potential containers can have, for example, different materials, volumes, dimensions, shapes, and/or sealing mechanisms (e.g., tape, slots and tabs, adhesive, etc.), accordingly, the container parameters can indicate, for example, a type of container (e.g., a material, a thickness, a shape, a volume, dimensions, a sealing mechanism, a construction type, performance characteristics, etc.) and a quantity of containers for packaging the one or more items i according to the packaging specification 16 as described in figs. 1-2 paragraph 71))
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate this feature (customized package) taught by Linnell into the method recited by claim 1 of Patent No. 11,875,389.
One skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the feature as taught by Linnell above into the method recited in claim 1 of Patent No. 11,875,389 for the benefit having an automated packaging manufacturing system 150 that produces one or more custom protective structures for receiving and positioning the items i in the container 370 according to the custom packaging specification 16, wherein the packaging optimization module 105 determines the custom packaging specification 16 after the order 2 is received, so that the custom packaging specification 16 can provide a more optimal packaging arrangement based on the actual combination 14 of items i in the order 2, correspondingly, the automated packaging manufacturing system 150 produces the one or more custom protective structures after the order 2 is received and when the custom packaging specification 16 is ready, wherein to provide prompt shipment of the order 2, manufacturing of the one or more custom protective structures is preferably completed by the time that the items i have been assembled and are ready for packing, in other words, rapid manufacturing of the one or more protective structures occurs while the items i are simultaneously retrieved from an inventory storage 110 and assembled at a packing location 141 in order to improve efficiency when producing one or more custom protective structures for receiving and positioning the items i in the container 370 according to the custom packaging specification 16 (see figs. 1-3 ¶ 147)
Claims 3-5, 12-14 and 17-19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 3-5 of Patent No. US 11,875,389, and further in view of HEINLA (WO 2018/099930), and further in view of Linnell et al. (US 2018/0297266 A1), and further in view of HIGUCHI et al. Pub. No. US 2019/0213291.
Re claim 3, claim 3 of the Patent No. 11,875,389 modified by HEINLA and Linnell as discussed in claim 1 above, recites each and every limitation of claim 3 of the Instant Application except for the limitation of “determining whether the item is fragile based on rates of damage for other items associated with the identity of the item.”
However, the reference of HIGUCHI explicitly teaches “determining whether the item is fragile based on rates of damage for other items associated with the identity of the item” (see ¶s 93, 96 for determining whether the item is fragile based on rates of damage for other items associated with the identity of the item (i.e. simulator 102 determines whether the target article can be placed based on the destructiveness of the target article and the fragility of the article in the lower row, simulator 102 determines that the target article cannot be placed as the fragility of the lower article is higher and the destructiveness of the upper article is higher as described in figs. 9-10 paragraph 94). It should be noted that the destructiveness of the target article and the fragility of the article represent the rates of damage for other articles associated with the identity of the article as shown in figs. 9-10)
Therefore, taking the combined teachings of Patent No. 11,875,389, HEINLA, Linnell and HIGUCHI as a whole, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate this feature (fragile) into the system of Patent No. 11,875,389 as taught by HIGUCHI.
One would have been motivated to incorporate the above feature as taught by HIGUCHI into the system of Patent No. 11,875,389 for the benefit of determining whether the target article can be placed based on the destructiveness of the target article and the fragility of the article in the lower row, for example, simulator 102 determines whether the target article can be placed based on the relationship shown in FIG. 10, wherein the simulator 102 determines that the target article cannot be placed as the fragility of the lower article is higher and the destructiveness of the upper article is higher, and since it is possible to prevent destructive articles from being placed on fragile articles, damage or the like of fragile articles can be suppressed in order to improve efficiency when preventing destructive articles from being placed on fragile articles, so damage or the like of fragile articles can be suppressed (see figs. 9-10 ¶s 94, 96)
Re claim 4, claim 4 of the Patent No. 11,875,389 modified by HEINLA as discussed in claim 1 above, recites each and every limitation of claim 4 of the Instant Application except for the limitation of “selecting a packaging material for construction of the customized package in response to determining that the item is fragile.”
However, the reference of HIGUCHI explicitly teaches “selecting a packaging material for construction of the customized package in response to determining that the item is fragile” (see fig. 3 ¶ 53 for selecting a packaging material for construction of the customized package in response to determining that the item is fragile (i.e. simulator 102 uses the size of each of the plurality of articles and the size of the storage container to determine the initial value of the minimum number of storage containers that can store a plurality of articles as described in fig. 1 paragraph 57, furthermore, a more fragile article is stored later as described in paragraph 63))
Therefore, taking the combined teachings of Patent No. 11,875,389, HEINLA, Linnell and HIGUCHI as a whole, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate this feature (fragile) into the system of Patent No. 11,875,389 as taught by HIGUCHI.
Per claim 4, Patent No. 11,875,389, HEINLA, Linnell and HIGUCHI are combined for the same motivation as set forth in claim 3 above.
Re claim 5, claim 5 of the Patent No. 11,875,389 modified by HEINLA and Linnell as discussed in claim 1 above, recites each and every limitation of claim 5 of the Instant Application except for the limitation of “generating an indication that the item is fragile for inclusion in the posting for the item or on the customized package for the item.”
However, the reference of HIGUCHI explicitly teaches “generating an indication that the item is fragile for inclusion in the posting for the item or on the customized package for the item” (see fig. 3 ¶ 53 for generating an indication that the item is fragile for inclusion in the posting for the item or on the customized package for the item (i.e. simulator 102 uses the size of each of the plurality of articles and the size of the storage container to determine the initial value of the minimum number of storage containers that can store a plurality of articles as described in fig. 1 paragraph 57, furthermore, a more fragile article is stored later as described in paragraph 63, moreover, in a case where the fragility indicated by article information 111 is equal to or higher than a predetermined criterion, simulator 102 determines that the target article is a fragile article as described in fig. 5 paragraph 75))
Therefore, taking the combined teachings of Patent No. 11,875,389, HEINLA, Linnell and HIGUCHI as a whole, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate this feature (fragile) into the system of Patent No. 11,875,389 as taught by HIGUCHI.
Per claim 5, Patent No. 11,875,389, HEINLA, Linnell and HIGUCHI are combined for the same motivation as set forth in claim 3 above.
Re claim 12, the combination of Patent No. 11,875,389, HEINLA, Linnell and HIGUCHI as discussed in claim 3 above discloses all the claimed limitations of claim 12.
Re claim 13, the combination of Patent No. 11,875,389, HEINLA, Linnell and HIGUCHI as discussed in claim 4 above discloses all the claimed limitations of claim 13.
Re claim 14, the combination of Patent No. 11,875,389, HEINLA, Linnell and HIGUCHI as discussed in claim 5 above discloses all the claimed limitations of claim 14.
Re claim 17, the combination of Patent No. 11,875,389, HEINLA, Linnell and HIGUCHI as discussed in claim 3 above discloses all the claimed limitations of claim 17.
Re claim 18, the combination of Patent No. 11,875,389, HEINLA, Linnell and HIGUCHI as discussed in claim 4 above discloses all the claimed limitations of claim 18.
Re claim 19, the combination of Patent No. 11,875,389, HEINLA, Linnell and HIGUCHI as discussed in claim 5 above discloses all the claimed limitations of claim 19.
Claim 9 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of Patent No. US 11,875,389, further in view of HEINLA (WO 2018/099930), and further in view of Linnell et al. (US 2018/0297266 A1), and further in view of McKenna et al. Pub. No. US 2009/0313132.
Re claim 9, claim 1 of the Patent No. 11,875,389 modified by HEINLA and Linnell as discussed in claim 1 above, recites each and every limitation of claim 9 of the Instant Application except for the limitation of “wherein the compartment is configured to store the item until the processing device receives an indication that the item is sold.”
However, the reference of McKenna explicitly teaches “wherein the compartment is configured to store the item until the processing device receives an indication that the item is sold” (see ¶ 24 for the compartment is configured to store the item until the processing device receives an indication that the item is sold (i.e. POS component 110 might be connected to a database that contains a catalog of items that are available for sale, and the prices of those items, POS component 110 may receive indications of items 112 to be sold/purchased and/or prices 114, and the foregoing are merely some examples of how POS component 110 could receive this information as shown in fig. 1))
Therefore, taking the combined teachings of Patent No. 11,875,389, HEINLA, Linnell and McKenna as a whole, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate this feature (indication) into the system of Patent No. 11,875,389 as taught by McKenna.
One would have been motivated to incorporate the above feature as taught by McKenna into the system of Patent No. 11,875,389 for the benefit of showing POS component 110 receiving indications 111 of the items 112 that are being sold/purchased, and/or the prices 114 of those items, wherein indications of items 112 and prices 114 could be received by POS component 110 in any manner, for example, POS component 110 might be connected to a database that contains a catalog of items that are available for sale, and the prices of those items, thus, the indications of which items are being purchased could be entered through a keyboard, scanner, touch-screen, etc. and the prices could be looked up in the database, or, in the example where POS component 110 is a cash register, a cashier could enter prices 114 into the cash register, wherein POS component 110 may receive indications of items 112 to be sold/purchased and/or prices 114, and the foregoing are merely some examples of how POS component 110 could receive this information in order to have a user friendly interaction (see fig. 1 ¶ 24)
Claim 22 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of Patent No. US 11,875,389, and further in view of HEINLA (WO 2018/099930), and further in view of Linnell et al. (US 2018/0297266 A1), and further in view of Hoffman et al. (US 10,669,054 B1).
Re claim 22, claim 1 of the Patent No. 11,875,389 modified by HEINLA and Linnell, recites each and every limitation of claim 22 of the Instant Application except for the limitation of “wherein collecting the at least one measurement of the item involves capturing images from multiple angles in conjunction with an item manipulation arm within the compartment that holds the item at different angles in relation to one or more cameras.”
However, the reference of Hoffman explicitly teaches “wherein collecting the at least one measurement of the item involves capturing images from multiple angles in conjunction with an item manipulation arm within the compartment that holds the item at different angles in relation to one or more cameras” (see col. 7 lines 62-67, col. 8 lines 3 for collecting the at least one measurement of the item involves capturing images from multiple angles in conjunction with an item manipulation arm within the compartment that holds the item at different angles in relation to one or more cameras (i.e. an item may be evaluated using one or more sensors, e.g., imaging devices (such as visual cameras or depth cameras), acoustic sensors, scales or other weight sensors, scanners, readers (such as radiofrequency identification readers, or RFID readers), or other sensors, information or data captured by one or more of such sensors may be used to determine one or more dimensions of the item, or any other information regarding the item (e.g., handling restrictions, components, intended uses or destinations), e.g., based on an analysis of the information or data, or by identifying the item from the information or data, upon identifying the item, one or more dimensions of the item in records or files maintained in one or more data stores may be identified and used to program an actuator system accordingly as described in col. 8 lines 3-23, furthermore, the sensor 236 may also be or include a camera or other imaging device configured to capture one or more images of items within its field of view or operating range, the sensor 236 may be hard-mounted to or embedded within one or more surfaces of the packaging system 230 in a manner that maintains the sensors in a fixed configuration or angle with respect to one, two or three axes, alternatively, however, the sensor 236 may be provided with one or more motors and/or controllers for manually or automatically operating one or more of the components, or for reorienting an axis or direction, i.e., by panning or tilting the sensor 236 as described in fig. 2 col. 11 lines 31-34 to lines 49-57, moreover, the robotic arm 260 may be any system having an end effector configured to grasp, orient, reorient and/or release an item, e.g., an item that is to be inserted into a cavity fabricated from thermoplastic material by the actuator system 240 as described in fig. 2 col. 13 lines 57-61). Also, see col. 11 lines 13-29)
Therefore, taking the combined teachings of Patent No. 11,875,389, HEINLA, Linnell and Hoffman as a whole, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate this feature (capturing images from multiple angles) into the system of Patent No. 11,875,389 as taught by Hoffman.
One would have been motivated to incorporate the above feature as taught by Hoffman into the system of Patent No. 11,875,389 for the benefit of having sensor 236 that may also be or include a camera or other imaging device configured to capture one or more images of items within its field of view or operating range, wherein the sensor 236 may be hard-mounted to or embedded within one or more surfaces of the packaging system 230 in a manner that maintains the sensors in a fixed configuration or angle with respect to one, two or three axes, alternatively, however, the sensor 236 may be provided with one or more motors and/or controllers for manually or automatically operating one or more of the components, or for reorienting an axis or direction, i.e., by panning or tilting the sensor 236 in order to ease the processing time when automatically operating one or more of the components, or for reorienting an axis or direction, i.e., by panning or tilting the sensor 236 (see fig. 2 col. 11 lines 31-34 to lines 49-57)
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
Claim limitation “processing device” has/have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses/they use a generic placeholder “device” coupled with functional language “...to perform...” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Since the claim limitation(s) invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, claim(s) 8-10 and 12-14 has/have been interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification that achieves the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation: For instance, see paragraphs 42, 120 of the specification of the Publication No. 2024/0070737 that recites “...computing device 130, which may perform instructions included in a memory to implement aspects of the embodiments. The computer architecture 600 illustrated in FIG. 6 includes a central processing unit 602 (“CPU”), a system memory 604, including a random-access memory 606 (“RAM”) and a read-only memory (“ROM”) 608, and a system bus 66 that couples the memory 604 to the CPU 602. A firmware containing basic routines that help to transfer information between elements within the computer architecture 600, such as during startup, is stored in the ROM 608. The computer architecture 600 further includes a mass storage device 612 for storing an operating system 614, other data such as supplemental information 222, and one or more executable programs, such as item identification engine 218.”
If applicant wishes to provide further explanation or dispute the examiner’s interpretation of the corresponding structure, applicant must identify the corresponding structure with reference to the specification by page and line number, and to the drawing, if any, by reference characters in response to this Office action.
If applicant does not intend to have the claim limitation(s) treated under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112 , sixth paragraph, applicant may amend the claim(s) so that it/they will clearly not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, or present a sufficient showing that the claim recites/recite sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function to preclude application of 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
For more information, see MPEP § 2173 et seq. and Supplementary Examination Guidelines for Determining Compliance With 35 U.S.C. 112 and for Treatment of Related Issues in Patent Applications, 76 FR 7162, 7167 (Feb. 9, 2011).
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.
Claims 1, 6-8, 10, 15, 20, 24 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HEINLA (WO 2018/099930 A1)(hereinafter HEINLA), and further in view of Linnell et al. (US 2018/0297266 A1)(hereinafter Linnell).
Re claim 1, HEINLA discloses a method implemented by a robotic assistant (i.e. mobile robot 1 as shown in fig. 1), the method comprising: receiving an item in a compartment (see page 24 lines 21-28 for receiving an item in a compartment (i.e. the packages 20, 22 are placed within the package space 10 as described in fig. 1 page 24 lines 28-29)); collecting at least one measurement of the item using a sensor associated with the compartment (see page 24 lines 21-28 for collecting at least one measurement of the item using a sensor associated with the compartment (i.e. package sensor 30 can be adapted to measure first data reflective of the presence or absence of each of a plurality of packages 20, 22 in the package space 10 as described in figs. 1-2 page 29 lines 1-3)); determining an identity of the item based on the at least one measurement of the item (see page 24 lines 21-29 for determining an identity of the item based on the at least one measurement of the item (i.e. package sensor 30 can be adapted to measure first data reflective of the presence or absence of each of a plurality of packages 20, 22 in the package space 10, and the identity of each such package 20, 22 by virtue of the package ID 32 such as a barcode, a QR code or a similar code and/or other specific package characteristic such as dimensions, weight, visual characteristics, RF tags and so on as described in figs. 1-2 page 29 lines 1-5)); generating a posting for the item that includes a description of the item based on the identity of the item (see page 24 lines 21-28 for generating a posting for the item that includes a description of the item based on the identity of the item (i.e. the packages 20, 22 are placed within the package space 10, they are schematically depicted in the figure as rectangular boxes, but can comprise any other shape, packages 20, 22 can comprise mail, documents, groceries, take-out, packages, and/or other items to be delivered as described in fig. 1 page 24 lines 28-32, furthermore, the identity of each such package 20, 22 by virtue of the package ID 32 such as a barcode, a QR code or a similar code and/or other specific package characteristic such as dimensions, weight, visual characteristics, RF tags and so on as described in figs. 1-2 page 29 lines 3-5)); determining dimensions for constructing a customized package for the item based on the at least one measurement of the item (see page 24 lines 21-29 for determining dimensions for a customized package for the item based on the at least one measurement of the item (i.e. the packages 20, 22 are placed within the package space 10, they are schematically depicted in the figure as rectangular boxes, but can comprise any other shape, packages 20, 22 can comprise mail, documents, groceries, take-out, packages, and/or other items to be delivered as described in fig. 1 page 24 lines 28-32, furthermore, package sensor 30 can be adapted to measure first data reflective of the presence or absence of each of a plurality of packages 20, 22 in the package space 10, and the identity of each such package 20, 22 by virtue of the package ID 32 such as a barcode, a QR code or a similar code and/or other specific package characteristic such as dimensions, weight, visual characteristics, RF tags and so on as described in figs. 1-2 page 29 lines 1-5). Thus, since package sensor 30 can be adapted to measure first data reflective of the presence or absence of each of a plurality of packages 20, 22 in the package space 10 and the identity of each such package 20, 22 by virtue of specific package characteristic such as dimensions, construction of each customized package 20, 22 has to include the determined dimensions)
HEINLA fails to explicitly teach identifying a material for constructing the customized package for the item based on the identity of the item and the dimensions; and constructing the customized package by folding a portion of the material based on the dimensions using a robotic arm inside the compartment. However, the reference of Linnell explicitly teaches identifying a material for constructing the customized package for the item based on the identity of the item and the dimensions (see ¶ 70 for identifying a material for constructing the customized package for the item based on the identity of the item and the dimensions (i.e. the item data includes various characteristics for each item in the catalog, for example, such characteristic data may include, but is not limited to, shape, size, weight, center of mass, shear strength, bending strength, compression strength, hardness/softness, solid/liquid, material composition, fragility, and value of an item as described in figs. 1-2 paragraph 43, furthermore, using the custom packaging specification 16, the automated packaging manufacturing system 150 makes one or more protective structures that are employed to position and protect the items i in one or more respective containers for shipping the order 02 as described in figs. 1-2 paragraph 50, moreover, the container parameter(s) indicate which of a plurality of potential containers is to be utilized by the automated packing system 140 for packing the one or more items i, the potential containers can have, for example, different materials, volumes, dimensions, shapes, and/or sealing mechanisms (e.g., tape, slots and tabs, adhesive, etc.), accordingly, the container parameters can indicate, for example, a type of container (e.g., a material, a thickness, a shape, a volume, dimensions, a sealing mechanism, a construction type, performance characteristics, etc.) and a quantity of containers for packaging the one or more items i according to the packaging specification 16 as described in figs. 1-2 paragraph 71)); and constructing the customized package by folding a portion of the material based on the dimensions using a robotic arm inside the compartment (see ¶s 70-71 for constructing the customized package by folding a portion of the material based on the dimensions using a robotic arm inside the compartment (i.e. the item data includes various characteristics for each item in the catalog, for example, such characteristic data may include, but is not limited to, shape, size, weight, center of mass, shear strength, bending strength, compression strength, hardness/softness, solid/liquid, material composition, fragility, and value of an item as described in figs. 1-2 paragraph 43, furthermore, using the custom packaging specification 16, the automated packaging manufacturing system 150 makes one or more protective structures that are employed to position and protect the items i in one or more respective containers for shipping the order 02 as described in figs. 1-2 paragraph 50, moreover, the protective structure 378A can be folded in half in a clamshell type manner to fully enclose the bottle as described in fig. 10 paragraph 162). Also, see figs. 6-9 paragraphs 144-145, 147, 153)
Therefore, taking the combined teachings of HEINLA and Linnell as a whole, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate this feature (customized package) into the system of HEINLA as taught by Linnell.
One would have been motivated to incorporate the above feature as taught by Linnell into the system of HEINLA for the benefit of having an automated packaging manufacturing system 150 that produces one or more custom protective structures for receiving and positioning the items i in the container 370 according to the custom packaging specification 16, wherein the packaging optimization module 105 determines the custom packaging specification 16 after the order 2 is received, so that the custom packaging specification 16 can provide a more optimal packaging arrangement based on the actual combination 14 of items i in the order 2, correspondingly, the automated packaging manufacturing system 150 produces the one or more custom protective structures after the order 2 is received and when the custom packaging specification 16 is ready, wherein to provide prompt shipment of the order 2, manufacturing of the one or more custom protective structures is preferably completed by the time that the items i have been assembled and are ready for packing, in other words, rapid manufacturing of the one or more protective structures occurs while the items i are simultaneously retrieved from an inventory storage 110 and assembled at a packing location 141 in order to improve efficiency when producing one or more custom protective structures for receiving and positioning the items i in the container 370 according to the custom packaging specification 16 (see figs. 1-3 ¶ 147)
Re claim 6, the combination of HEINLA and Linnell as discussed in claim 1 above discloses all the claim limitations with additional claim feature taught by HEINLA wherein the at least one measurement specifies a weight of the item or a size of the item (see page 24 lines 21-29 for the at least one measurement specifies a weight of the item or a size of the item (i.e. package sensor 30 can be adapted to measure first data reflective of the presence or absence of each of a plurality of packages 20, 22 in the package space 10, and the identity of each such package 20, 22 by virtue of the package ID 32 such as a barcode, a QR code or a similar code and/or other specific package characteristic such as dimensions, weight, visual characteristics, RF tags and so on as described in figs. 1-2 page 29 lines 1-5))
Re claim 7, the combination of HEINLA and Linnell as discussed in claim 1 above discloses all the claim limitations with additional claim feature taught by HEINLA further comprising: receiving a request to deliver the item to a defined location (see page 9 lines 1-12 for receiving a request to deliver the item to a defined location (i.e. the delivery recipient can use the personal computing device to request the delivery by the robot, for example request delivery at a certain time and location as described in page 8 lines 29-31)); and moving the compartment to the defined location to deliver the item in response to the request to deliver the item (see page 9 lines 1-12 for moving the compartment to the defined location to deliver the item in response to the request to deliver the item (i.e. the remote terminal can detect that the robot has reached the desired delivery location and send the robot a command to unlock the electronic lock and/or to open the robot's lid, for example, the remote operator can observe that the robot approached a correct house at the delivery location and that a person is standing in front of said house, deducing that the person is the delivery recipient and sending the robot the command to provide access to the package space as described in page 9 lines 4-9). Also, see fig. 3 page 27 lines 33-35, page 28 lines 1-12)
Re claim 8, HEINLA discloses a system comprising: a compartment to receive an item (see page 24 lines 21-28 for a compartment to receive an item (i.e. the packages 20, 22 are placed within the package space 10 as described in fig. 1 page 24 lines 28-29)); a sensor associated with the compartment to collect at least one measurement of the item (see page 24 lines 21-28 for a sensor associated with the compartment to collect at least one measurement of the item (i.e. package sensor 30 can be adapted to measure first data reflective of the presence or absence of each of a plurality of packages 20, 22 in the package space 10 as described in figs. 1-2 page 29 lines 1-3)); and a processing device coupled to a memory component and associated with the compartment, the processing device to perform operations including (i.e. the robot's processing component for further manipulation and/or storage as described in page 10 lines 30-32, furthermore, the robot's processing component, the processing component can comprise a system on a chip, a standard CPU and/or GPU or a combination thereof, a person skilled in the art will recognize that the robot can utilize a plurality of widely available processing components similar to the ones in personal computing devices (such as mobile phones, tablets and the like), and/or utilize a custom processing component better adapted to the robot's uses as described in page 12 lines 4-10). Also, see page 24 lines 21-26): determining an identity of the item based on the at least one measurement of the item (see page 24 lines 21-29 for determining an identity of the item based on the at least one measurement of the item (i.e. package sensor 30 can be adapted to measure first data reflective of the presence or absence of each of a plurality of packages 20, 22 in the package space 10, and the identity of each such package 20, 22 by virtue of the package ID 32 such as a barcode, a QR code or a similar code and/or other specific package characteristic such as dimensions, weight, visual characteristics, RF tags and so on as described in figs. 1-2 page 29 lines 1-5)); generating a posting for the item that includes a description of the item based on the identity of the item (see page 24 lines 21-28 for generating a posting for the item that includes a description of the item based on the identity of the item (i.e. the packages 20, 22 are placed within the package space 10, they are schematically depicted in the figure as rectangular boxes, but can comprise any other shape, packages 20, 22 can comprise mail, documents, groceries, take-out, packages, and/or other items to be delivered as described in fig. 1 page 24 lines 28-32, furthermore, the identity of each such package 20, 22 by virtue of the package ID 32 such as a barcode, a QR code or a similar code and/or other specific package characteristic such as dimensions, weight, visual characteristics, RF tags and so on as described in figs. 1-2 page 29 lines 3-5)); determining dimensions for constructing a customized package for the item based on the at least one measurement of the item (see page 24 lines 21-29 for determining dimensions for constructing a customized package for the item based on the at least one measurement of the item (i.e. the packages 20, 22 are placed within the package space 10, they are schematically depicted in the figure as rectangular boxes, but can comprise any other shape, packages 20, 22 can comprise mail, documents, groceries, take-out, packages, and/or other items to be delivered as described in fig. 1 page 24 lines 28-32, furthermore, package sensor 30 can be adapted to measure first data reflective of the presence or absence of each of a plurality of packages 20, 22 in the package space 10, and the identity of each such package 20, 22 by virtue of the package ID 32 such as a barcode, a QR code or a similar code and/or other specific package characteristic such as dimensions, weight, visual characteristics, RF tags and so on as described in figs. 1-2 page 29 lines 1-5). Thus, since package sensor 30 can be adapted to measure first data reflective of the presence or absence of each of a plurality of packages 20, 22 in the package space 10 and the identity of each such package 20, 22 by virtue of specific package characteristic such as dimensions, construction of each customized package 20, 22 has to include the determined dimensions)
HEINLA fails to explicitly teach identifying a material for constructing the customized package for the item based on the identity of the item and the dimensions; and constructing the customized package by folding a portion of the material based on the dimensions using a robotic arm inside the compartment. However, the reference of Linnell explicitly teaches identifying a material for constructing the customized package for the item based on the identity of the item and the dimensions (see ¶ 70 for identifying a material for constructing the customized package for the item based on the identity of the item and the dimensions (i.e. the item data includes various characteristics for each item in the catalog, for example, such characteristic data may include, but is not limited to, shape, size, weight, center of mass, shear strength, bending strength, compression strength, hardness/softness, solid/liquid, material composition, fragility, and value of an item as described in figs. 1-2 paragraph 43, furthermore, using the custom packaging specification 16, the automated packaging manufacturing system 150 makes one or more protective structures that are employed to position and protect the items i in one or more respective containers for shipping the order 02 as described in figs. 1-2 paragraph 50, moreover, the container parameter(s) indicate which of a plurality of potential containers is to be utilized by the automated packing system 140 for packing the one or more items i, the potential containers can have, for example, different materials, volumes, dimensions, shapes, and/or sealing mechanisms (e.g., tape, slots and tabs, adhesive, etc.), accordingly, the container parameters can indicate, for example, a type of container (e.g., a material, a thickness, a shape, a volume, dimensions, a sealing mechanism, a construction type, performance characteristics, etc.) and a quantity of containers for packaging the one or more items i according to the packaging specification 16 as described in figs. 1-2 paragraph 71)); and constructing the customized package by folding a portion of the material based on the dimensions using a robotic arm inside the compartment (see ¶s 70-71 for constructing the customized package by folding a portion of the material based on the dimensions using a robotic arm inside the compartment (i.e. the item data includes various characteristics for each item in the catalog, for example, such characteristic data may include, but is not limited to, shape, size, weight, center of mass, shear strength, bending strength, compression strength, hardness/softness, solid/liquid, material composition, fragility, and value of an item as described in figs. 1-2 paragraph 43, furthermore, using the custom packaging specification 16, the automated packaging manufacturing system 150 makes one or more protective structures that are employed to position and protect the items i in one or more respective containers for shipping the order 02 as described in figs. 1-2 paragraph 50, moreover, the protective structure 378A can be folded in half in a clamshell type manner to fully enclose the bottle as described in fig. 10 paragraph 162). Also, see figs. 6-9 paragraphs 144-145, 147, 153)
Therefore, taking the combined teachings of HEINLA and Linnell as a whole, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate this feature (customized package) into the system of HEINLA as taught by Linnell.
One would have been motivated to incorporate the above feature as taught by Linnell into the system of HEINLA for the benefit of having an automated packaging manufacturing system 150 that produces one or more custom protective structures for receiving and positioning the items i in the container 370 according to the custom packaging specification 16, wherein the packaging optimization module 105 determines the custom packaging specification 16 after the order 2 is received, so that the custom packaging specification 16 can provide a more optimal packaging arrangement based on the actual combination 14 of items i in the order 2, correspondingly, the automated packaging manufacturing system 150 produces the one or more custom protective structures after the order 2 is received and when the custom packaging specification 16 is ready, wherein to provide prompt shipment of the order 2, manufacturing of the one or more custom protective structures is preferably completed by the time that the items i have been assembled and are ready for packing, in other words, rapid manufacturing of the one or more protective structures occurs while the items i are simultaneously retrieved from an inventory storage 110 and assembled at a packing location 141 in order to improve efficiency when producing one or more custom protective structures for receiving and positioning the items i in the container 370 according to the custom packaging specification 16 (see figs. 1-3 ¶ 147)
Re claim 10, the combination of HEINLA and Linnell as discussed in claim 8 above discloses all the claim limitations with additional claim feature taught by HEINLA wherein the compartment is configured to transport the item (see page 24 lines 21-32 for the compartment is configured to transport the item (i.e. the packages 20, 22 are placed within the package space 10 as described in fig. 1 page 24 lines 28-29, furthermore, the remote terminal can detect that the robot has reached the desired delivery location as described in page 9 lines 4-5). Also, see fig. 3 page 27 lines 33-35, page 28 lines 1-12)
Re claim 15, HEINLA discloses a computer-readable storage medium having computer-executable instructions stored thereupon which, when executed by a processor of a computing device, cause the computing device to: receive an item in a compartment (see page 24 lines 21-28 for receive an item in a compartment (i.e. the packages 20, 22 are placed within the package space 10 as described in fig. 1 page 24 lines 28-29)); collect at least one measurement of the item using a sensor associated with the compartment (see page 24 lines 21-28 for collect at least one measurement of the item using a sensor associated with the compartment (i.e. package sensor 30 can be adapted to measure first data reflective of the presence or absence of each of a plurality of packages 20, 22 in the package space 10 as described in figs. 1-2 page 29 lines 1-3)); determine an identity of the item based on the at least one measurement of the item (see page 24 lines 21-29 for determine an identity of the item based on the at least one measurement of the item (i.e. package sensor 30 can be adapted to measure first data reflective of the presence or absence of each of a plurality of packages 20, 22 in the package space 10, and the identity of each such package 20, 22 by virtue of the package ID 32 such as a barcode, a QR code or a similar code and/or other specific package characteristic such as dimensions, weight, visual characteristics, RF tags and so on as described in figs. 1-2 page 29 lines 1-5)); generate a posting for the item that includes a description of the item based on the identity of the item (see page 24 lines 21-28 for generate a posting for the item that includes a description of the item based on the identity of the item (i.e. the packages 20, 22 are placed within the package space 10, they are schematically depicted in the figure as rectangular boxes, but can comprise any other shape, packages 20, 22 can comprise mail, documents, groceries, take-out, packages, and/or other items to be delivered as described in fig. 1 page 24 lines 28-32, furthermore, the identity of each such package 20, 22 by virtue of the package ID 32 such as a barcode, a QR code or a similar code and/or other specific package characteristic such as dimensions, weight, visual characteristics, RF tags and so on as described in figs. 1-2 page 29 lines 3-5)); determine dimensions for constructing a customized package for the item based on the at least one measurement of the item (see page 24 lines 21-29 for determine dimensions for constructing a customized package for the item based on the at least one measurement of the item (i.e. the packages 20, 22 are placed within the package space 10, they are schematically depicted in the figure as rectangular boxes, but can comprise any other shape, packages 20, 22 can comprise mail, documents, groceries, take-out, packages, and/or other items to be delivered as described in fig. 1 page 24 lines 28-32, furthermore, package sensor 30 can be adapted to measure first data reflective of the presence or absence of each of a plurality of packages 20, 22 in the package space 10, and the identity of each such package 20, 22 by virtue of the package ID 32 such as a barcode, a QR code or a similar code and/or other specific package characteristic such as dimensions, weight, visual characteristics, RF tags and so on as described in figs. 1-2 page 29 lines 1-5). Thus, since package sensor 30 can be adapted to measure first data reflective of the presence or absence of each of a plurality of packages 20, 22 in the package space 10 and the identity of each such package 20, 22 by virtue of specific package characteristic such as dimensions, construction of each customized package 20, 22 has to include the determined dimensions)
HEINLA fails to explicitly teach identifying a material for constructing the customized package for the item based on the identity of the item and the dimensions; and constructing the customized package by folding a portion of the material based on the dimensions using a robotic arm inside the compartment. However, the reference of Linnell explicitly teaches identifying a material for constructing the customized package for the item based on the identity of the item and the dimensions (see ¶ 70 for identifying a material for constructing the customized package for the item based on the identity of the item and the dimensions (i.e. the item data includes various characteristics for each item in the catalog, for example, such characteristic data may include, but is not limited to, shape, size, weight, center of mass, shear strength, bending strength, compression strength, hardness/softness, solid/liquid, material composition, fragility, and value of an item as described in figs. 1-2 paragraph 43, furthermore, using the custom packaging specification 16, the automated packaging manufacturing system 150 makes one or more protective structures that are employed to position and protect the items i in one or more respective containers for shipping the order 02 as described in figs. 1-2 paragraph 50, moreover, the container parameter(s) indicate which of a plurality of potential containers is to be utilized by the automated packing system 140 for packing the one or more items i, the potential containers can have, for example, different materials, volumes, dimensions, shapes, and/or sealing mechanisms (e.g., tape, slots and tabs, adhesive, etc.), accordingly, the container parameters can indicate, for example, a type of container (e.g., a material, a thickness, a shape, a volume, dimensions, a sealing mechanism, a construction type, performance characteristics, etc.) and a quantity of containers for packaging the one or more items i according to the packaging specification 16 as described in figs. 1-2 paragraph 71)); and constructing the customized package by folding a portion of the material based on the dimensions using a robotic arm inside the compartment (see ¶s 70-71 for constructing the customized package by folding a portion of the material based on the dimensions using a robotic arm inside the compartment (i.e. the item data includes various characteristics for each item in the catalog, for example, such characteristic data may include, but is not limited to, shape, size, weight, center of mass, shear strength, bending strength, compression strength, hardness/softness, solid/liquid, material composition, fragility, and value of an item as described in figs. 1-2 paragraph 43, furthermore, using the custom packaging specification 16, the automated packaging manufacturing system 150 makes one or more protective structures that are employed to position and protect the items i in one or more respective containers for shipping the order 02 as described in figs. 1-2 paragraph 50, moreover, the protective structure 378A can be folded in half in a clamshell type manner to fully enclose the bottle as described in fig. 10 paragraph 162). Also, see figs. 6-9 paragraphs 144-145, 147, 153)
Therefore, taking the combined teachings of HEINLA and Linnell as a whole, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate this feature (customized package) into the system of HEINLA as taught by Linnell.
One would have been motivated to incorporate the above feature as taught by Linnell into the system of HEINLA for the benefit of having an automated packaging manufacturing system 150 that produces one or more custom protective structures for receiving and positioning the items i in the container 370 according to the custom packaging specification 16, wherein the packaging optimization module 105 determines the custom packaging specification 16 after the order 2 is received, so that the custom packaging specification 16 can provide a more optimal packaging arrangement based on the actual combination 14 of items i in the order 2, correspondingly, the automated packaging manufacturing system 150 produces the one or more custom protective structures after the order 2 is received and when the custom packaging specification 16 is ready, wherein to provide prompt shipment of the order 2, manufacturing of the one or more custom protective structures is preferably completed by the time that the items i have been assembled and are ready for packing, in other words, rapid manufacturing of the one or more protective structures occurs while the items i are simultaneously retrieved from an inventory storage 110 and assembled at a packing location 141 in order to improve efficiency when producing one or more custom protective structures for receiving and positioning the items i in the container 370 according to the custom packaging specification 16 (see figs. 1-3 ¶ 147)
Re claim 20, the combination of HEINLA and Linnell as discussed in claims 7 and 15 above discloses all the claimed limitations of claim 20.
Re claim 24, the combination of HEINLA and Linnell as discussed in claim 1 above discloses all the claimed limitations but fails to explicitly teach wherein the customized package is based on a three dimensional model of the item formed from the at least one measurement of the item. However, the reference of Linnell explicitly teaches wherein the customized package is based on a three dimensional model of the item formed from the at least one measurement of the item (see ¶s 45, 77 for the customized package is based on a three dimensional model of the item formed from the at least one measurement of the item (i.e. a three-dimensional data model can be determined for each item i based on the characteristic data 14 relating to the size, shape and/or dimensions as described in figs. 1-3 paragraph 76))
Therefore, taking the combined teachings of HEINLA and Linnell as a whole, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate this feature (customized package) into the system of HEINLA as taught by Linnell.
Per claim 24, HEINLA and Linnell are combined for the same motivation as set forth in claim 1 above.
Re claim 25, the combination of HEINLA and Linnell as discussed in claim 1 above discloses all the claimed limitations but fails to explicitly teach identifying the material for constructing the customized package for the item based on a weight of the item. However, the reference of Linnell explicitly teaches identifying the material for constructing the customized package for the item based on a weight of the item (see ¶ 45 for identifying the material for constructing the customized package for the item based on a weight of the item (i.e. the item data includes various characteristics for each item in the catalog, for example, such characteristic data may include, but is not limited to, shape, size, weight, center of mass, shear strength, bending strength, compression strength, hardness/softness, solid/liquid, material composition, fragility, and value of an item as described in figs. 1-2 paragraph 43, furthermore, using the custom packaging specification 16, the automated packaging manufacturing system 150 makes one or more protective structures that are employed to position and protect the items i in one or more respective containers for shipping the order 02 as described in figs. 1-2 paragraph 50, moreover, the container parameter(s) indicate which of a plurality of potential containers is to be utilized by the automated packing system 140 for packing the one or more items i, the potential containers can have, for example, different materials, volumes, dimensions, shapes, and/or sealing mechanisms (e.g., tape, slots and tabs, adhesive, etc.), accordingly, the container parameters can indicate, for example, a type of container (e.g., a material, a thickness, a shape, a volume, dimensions, a sealing mechanism, a construction type, performance characteristics, etc.) and a quantity of containers for packaging the one or more items i according to the packaging specification 16 as described in figs. 1-2 paragraph 71))
Therefore, taking the combined teachings of HEINLA and Linnell as a whole, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate this feature (customized package) into the system of HEINLA as taught by Linnell.
Per claim 25, HEINLA and Linnell are combined for the same motivation as set forth in claim 1 above.
Claims 3-5, 12-14 and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HEINLA (WO 2018/099930 A1)(hereinafter HEINLA) as applied to claims 1, 6-8, 10, 15, 20, 24 and 25 above, and further in view of Linnell et al. (US 2018/0297266 A1)(hereinafter Linnell), and further in view of HIGUCHI et al. (US 2019/0213291 A1)(hereinafter HIGUCHI).
Re claim 3, the combination of HEINLA and Linnell as discussed in claim 1 above discloses all the claimed limitations but fails to explicitly teach further comprising determining whether the item is fragile based on rates of damage for other items associated with the identity of the item. However, the reference of HIGUCHI explicitly teaches further comprising determining whether the item is fragile based on rates of damage for other items associated with the identity of the item (see ¶s 93, 96 for determining whether the item is fragile based on rates of damage for other items associated with the identity of the item (i.e. simulator 102 determines whether the target article can be placed based on the destructiveness of the target article and the fragility of the article in the lower row, simulator 102 determines that the target article cannot be placed as the fragility of the lower article is higher and the destructiveness of the upper article is higher as described in figs. 9-10 paragraph 94). It should be noted that the destructiveness of the target article and the fragility of the article represent the rates of damage for other articles associated with the identity of the article as shown in figs. 9-10)
Therefore, taking the combined teachings of HEINLA, Linnell and HIGUCHI as a whole, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate this feature (fragile) into the system of HEINLA as taught by HIGUCHI.
One would have been motivated to incorporate the above feature as taught by HIGUCHI into the system of HEINLA for the benefit of determining whether the target article can be placed based on the destructiveness of the target article and the fragility of the article in the lower row, for example, simulator 102 determines whether the target article can be placed based on the relationship shown in FIG. 10, wherein the simulator 102 determines that the target article cannot be placed as the fragility of the lower article is higher and the destructiveness of the upper article is higher, and since it is possible to prevent destructive articles from being placed on fragile articles, damage or the like of fragile articles can be suppressed in order to improve efficiency when preventing destructive articles from being placed on fragile articles, so damage or the like of fragile articles can be suppressed (see figs. 9-10 ¶s 94, 96)
Re claim 4, the combination of HEINLA, Linnell and HIGUCHI as discussed in claim 3 above discloses all the claimed limitations but fails to explicitly teach further comprising identifying the material for the constructing the customized package in response to determining that the item is fragile. However, the reference of HIGUCHI explicitly teaches further comprising identifying the material for the constructing the customized package in response to determining that the item is fragile (see fig. 3 ¶ 53 for identifying the material for the constructing of the customized package in response to determining that the item is fragile (i.e. simulator 102 uses the size of each of the plurality of articles and the size of the storage container to determine the initial value of the minimum number of storage containers that can store a plurality of articles as described in fig. 1 paragraph 57, furthermore, a more fragile article is stored later as described in paragraph 63). Also, see paragraphs 54-56)
Therefore, taking the combined teachings of HEINLA, Linnell and HIGUCHI as a whole, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate this feature (fragile) into the system of HEINLA as taught by HIGUCHI.
Per claim 4, HEINLA, Linnell and HIGUCHI are combined for the same motivation as set forth in claim 3 above.
Re claim 5, the combination of HEINLA and Linnell as discussed in claim 1 above discloses all the claimed limitations but fails to explicitly teach further comprising generating an indication that the item is fragile for inclusion in the posting for the item or on the customized package for the item. However, the reference of HIGUCHI explicitly teaches further comprising generating an indication that the item is fragile for inclusion in the posting for the item or on the customized package for the item (see fig. 3 ¶ 53 for generating an indication that the item is fragile for inclusion in the posting for the item or on the customized package for the item (i.e. simulator 102 uses the size of each of the plurality of articles and the size of the storage container to determine the initial value of the minimum number of storage containers that can store a plurality of articles as described in fig. 1 paragraph 57, furthermore, a more fragile article is stored later as described in paragraph 63, moreover, in a case where the fragility indicated by article information 111 is equal to or higher than a predetermined criterion, simulator 102 determines that the target article is a fragile article as described in fig. 5 paragraph 75))
Therefore, taking the combined teachings of HEINLA, Linnell and HIGUCHI as a whole, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate this feature (fragile) into the system of HEINLA as taught by HIGUCHI.
Per claim 5, HEINLA, Linnell and HIGUCHI are combined for the same motivation as set forth in claim 3 above.
Re claim 12, the combination of HEINLA, Linnell and HIGUCHI as discussed in claim 3 above discloses all the claimed limitations of claim 12.
Re claim 13, the combination of HEINLA, Linnell and HIGUCHI as discussed in claim 4 above discloses all the claimed limitations of claim 13.
Re claim 14, the combination of HEINLA, Linnell and HIGUCHI as discussed in claim 5 above discloses all the claimed limitations of claim 14.
Re claim 17, the combination of HEINLA, Linnell and HIGUCHI as discussed in claim 3 above discloses all the claimed limitations of claim 17.
Re claim 18, the combination of HEINLA, Linnell and HIGUCHI as discussed in claim 4 above discloses all the claimed limitations of claim 18.
Re claim 19, the combination of HEINLA, Linnell and HIGUCHI as discussed in claim 5 above discloses all the claimed limitations of claim 19.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HEINLA (WO 2018/099930 A1)(hereinafter HEINLA) as applied to claims 1, 6-8, 10, 15, 20, 24 and 25 above, and further in view of Linnell et al. (US 2018/0297266 A1)(hereinafter Linnell), and further in view of McKenna et al. (US 2009/0313132 A1)(hereinafter McKenna).
Re claim 9, the combination of HEINLA and Linnell as discussed in claim 8 above discloses all the claimed limitations but fails to explicitly teach wherein the compartment is configured to store the item until the processing device receives an indication that the item is sold. However, the reference of McKenna explicitly teaches wherein the compartment is configured to store the item until the processing device receives an indication that the item is sold (see ¶ 24 for the compartment is configured to store the item until the processing device receives an indication that the item is sold (i.e. POS component 110 might be connected to a database that contains a catalog of items that are available for sale, and the prices of those items, POS component 110 may receive indications of items 112 to be sold/purchased and/or prices 114, and the foregoing are merely some examples of how POS component 110 could receive this information as shown in fig. 1))
Therefore, taking the combined teachings of HEINLA, Linnell and McKenna as a whole, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate this feature (indication) into the system of HEINLA as taught by McKenna.
One would have been motivated to incorporate the above feature as taught by McKenna into the system of HEINLA for the benefit of showing POS component 110 receiving indications 111 of the items 112 that are being sold/purchased, and/or the prices 114 of those items, wherein indications of items 112 and prices 114 could be received by POS component 110 in any manner, for example, POS component 110 might be connected to a database that contains a catalog of items that are available for sale, and the prices of those items, thus, the indications of which items are being purchased could be entered through a keyboard, scanner, touch-screen, etc. and the prices could be looked up in the database, or, in the example where POS component 110 is a cash register, a cashier could enter prices 114 into the cash register, wherein POS component 110 may receive indications of items 112 to be sold/purchased and/or prices 114, and the foregoing are merely some examples of how POS component 110 could receive this information in order to have a user friendly interaction (see fig. 1 ¶ 24)
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HEINLA (WO 2018/099930 A1)(hereinafter HEINLA) as applied to claims 1, 6-8, 10, 15, 20, 24 and 25 above, and further in view of Linnell et al. (US 2018/0297266 A1)(hereinafter Linnell), and further in view of Hoffman et al. (US 10,669,054 B1).
Re claim 22, the combination of HEINLA and Linnell as discussed in claim 1 above discloses all the claimed limitations but fails to explicitly teach wherein collecting the at least one measurement of the item involves capturing images from multiple angles in conjunction with an item manipulation arm within the compartment that holds the item at different angles in relation to one or more cameras. However, the reference of Hoffman explicitly teaches wherein collecting the at least one measurement of the item involves capturing images from multiple angles in conjunction with an item manipulation arm within the compartment that holds the item at different angles in relation to one or more cameras (see col. 7 lines 62-67, col. 8 lines 3 for collecting the at least one measurement of the item involves capturing images from multiple angles in conjunction with an item manipulation arm within the compartment that holds the item at different angles in relation to one or more cameras (i.e. an item may be evaluated using one or more sensors, e.g., imaging devices (such as visual cameras or depth cameras), acoustic sensors, scales or other weight sensors, scanners, readers (such as radiofrequency identification readers, or RFID readers), or other sensors, information or data captured by one or more of such sensors may be used to determine one or more dimensions of the item, or any other information regarding the item (e.g., handling restrictions, components, intended uses or destinations), e.g., based on an analysis of the information or data, or by identifying the item from the information or data, upon identifying the item, one or more dimensions of the item in records or files maintained in one or more data stores may be identified and used to program an actuator system accordingly as described in col. 8 lines 3-23, furthermore, the sensor 236 may also be or include a camera or other imaging device configured to capture one or more images of items within its field of view or operating range, the sensor 236 may be hard-mounted to or embedded within one or more surfaces of the packaging system 230 in a manner that maintains the sensors in a fixed configuration or angle with respect to one, two or three axes, alternatively, however, the sensor 236 may be provided with one or more motors and/or controllers for manually or automatically operating one or more of the components, or for reorienting an axis or direction, i.e., by panning or tilting the sensor 236 as described in fig. 2 col. 11 lines 31-34 to lines 49-57, moreover, the robotic arm 260 may be any system having an end effector configured to grasp, orient, reorient and/or release an item, e.g., an item that is to be inserted into a cavity fabricated from thermoplastic material by the actuator system 240 as described in fig. 2 col. 13 lines 57-61). Also, see col. 11 lines 13-29)
Therefore, taking the combined teachings of HEINLA, Linnell and Hoffman as a whole, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate this feature (capturing images from multiple angles) into the system of HEINLA as taught by Hoffman.
One would have been motivated to incorporate the above feature as taught by Hoffman into the system of HEINLA for the benefit of having sensor 236 that may also be or include a camera or other imaging device configured to capture one or more images of items within its field of view or operating range, wherein the sensor 236 may be hard-mounted to or embedded within one or more surfaces of the packaging system 230 in a manner that maintains the sensors in a fixed configuration or angle with respect to one, two or three axes, alternatively, however, the sensor 236 may be provided with one or more motors and/or controllers for manually or automatically operating one or more of the components, or for reorienting an axis or direction, i.e., by panning or tilting the sensor 236 in order to ease the processing time when automatically operating one or more of the components, or for reorienting an axis or direction, i.e., by panning or tilting the sensor 236 (see fig. 2 col. 11 lines 31-34 to lines 49-57)
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSE M MESA whose telephone number is (571)270-1706. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30AM-6:00PM ET.
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, Thai Tran can be reached on 571-272-7382. 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.
9/11/2025
/JOSE M. MESA/
Examiner
Art Unit 2484
/THAI Q TRAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2484
Prosecution Insights