DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Status
2. Claims 1-20 are pending in this application.
Specification
3. The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification. MPEP § 608.01.
Examiner’s Note
4. The examiner would welcome an interview to clarify any of the various rejections seen below in order to expedite prosecution of the instant application. Applicant’s drafting approach that provided flexible optionality regarding the selection of shelves and associated structures in many of the claims enabled rejections that might not have been possible with a narrower writing of the claims.
Claim Interpretation
5. Claims 1, 4-6, 9-10, 12-13, and 18 recite an “unmanned vehicle portal” disclosed to be associated with an elevator. While applicant’s specification discloses UAVs or flying drones with a helicopter-style landing pad atop a system enclosure accessible via elevator, broadest reasonable interpretation of the term includes any sort of opening or access intended for any sort of unmanned vehicle, including, for example, a port in an enclosure suitable for an AGV or a torpedo tube on a submarine, so long as an elevator is properly related to the portal per a given claim’s limitations. We note as an aside that the claimed unmanned vehicle portal is usually one of several optional structures in a claim, and so for most claims prior art need not disclose any such vehicle or portal in order to anticipate applicant’s invention or demonstrate its obviousness.
6. Claims 1-4, 7-14, 18, and 20 recite an “actuatable elongate member” with a “distal end portion”. The adjectival form of “elongate” means “long in relation to width”. Broadest reasonable interpretation is any actuatable structure whose length is greater than its width with a discrete substructure at one end. Of course, this interpretation includes most robotic arms with end-effectors as well as a wide variety of other devices and structures such as extensible forks and lifting platforms and the like, but it also includes, for example, a ballpoint pen with a button at one end.
7. Claims 1, 4-7, 9, 12-15, and 18-19 disclose a “shelf” which is sometimes further limited in structure and configuration. According to our reading of the claims in light of the specification, there are at least two kinds of shelves in applicant’s system; the first is a shelf that is associated with the delivery of a package from a drone to the system (e.g. applicant’s ref. char 318) called in some but not all claims an “access shelf”, and the second are shelves that are used to store of packages in the system (e.g. applicant’s ref. char. 312). In many claims, two or three options are given for the relation of the claimed shelf to the system, and either or both of these interpretations may apply, but in other claims one or the other interpretation may be determined by context. Due to the optionality of the claims, the particular choice of shelf and its associated structure may vary from one rejection to another.
Claim Objections
8. Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities: independent claim 18 confusingly recites “a second package” in line 14 without having introduced a first package. “A package” or “a first package” is preferred for clarity. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
9. Claims 1-8, 12, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun, et al., US 11,633,058 (hereinafter Sun) in view of Moulin, et al., US 2020/0122923 (hereinafter Moulin).
10. Regarding claim 1,
Sun discloses:
A system, comprising: a shelf (pallet 21: fig. 2 or locker receiving portions 114: fig. 3, depending on association option) associated with one of (1) an elevator (lifting mechanism 23: fig. 2) having a range of motion configured to access an unmanned vehicle portal (channel of drone landing pad 31: fig. 1 per C5/L15-27), (2) a portal through which packages can be received and delivered (locker baffles 113: fig. 3), or (3) a package repository (locker system 11: fig. 2);We map the shelf to Sun’s pallet 21 for option (1) and to Sun’s locker receiving portion 114 for options (2) and (3).
a rail (any of the guide rods 223: fig. 2) having a rotational range of motion that includes a first position and a second position;Sun discloses rotation of the guide rods in C7/L19-33. All objects that rotate must at least be able to rotate between a first and some second position.
an actuatable elongate member coupled to the rail (second driving mechanism 25: fig. 2), the actuatable elongate member having a distal end portion (pallet supports 251-252: fig. 2) fixedly coupled to a distal end of the actuatable elongate member (C8/L13-43), the actuatable elongate member having a range of motion substantially along a first dimension between a retracted position and an extended position and having a range of motion relative to the rail and substantially along a second dimension that is different from the first dimension and that includes a first position and a second position;Sun discloses in C6/L64-C7/L18 that a lifting mechanism 23 moves a second driving mechanism 25 in a first vertical dimension and that the second driving mechanism moves an assembly including fixedly coupled supports 251-252 in a second horizontal dimension. Any motion whatsoever must move from a first position to some second position.
and an actuator (lifting mechanism 23, unnumbered first driving mechanism, second driving mechanism 25: fig. 21, C6/L64-C7/L18) configured to automatically cause, in response to a signal associated with one of delivery or receipt of a package, (1) the rail to rotate from the first position to the second position, (2) the actuatable elongate member to move relative to the rail substantially along the second dimension from the first position to the second position, and (3) the actuatable elongate member to move substantially along the first dimension from the retracted position to the extended position,Sun discloses the three claimed forms of movement: rotation, vertical movement, and horizontal movement, in C6/L64-C7/L18. We consider the claimed “retracted” position to be the one in which the pallet receives packages from the drone atop sorting system 21, and the “extended” position to be one in which the packages are delivered to shelves 114 following horizontal movement per the cited paragraph.
However, Sun does not fully disclose:
to position the distal end portion of the actuatable elongate member for retrieval of the package from the shelf While Sun discloses the claimed positioning in C8/L44-67 with respect to a locker shelf, the positioning is for the purpose of depositing a package to the shelf and not retrieving it from the shelf. As Sun is employing a fork-like device to place the package and as such devices are known in the art to be able to both pick and place articles, Sun has the capability and even the required mechanical configuration but not the implied method associated with the words of the previous limitation “to automatically cause”.
Moulin, an invention in the field of warehouse automation, teaches the missing aspect of:
to position the distal end portion of the actuatable elongate member for retrieval of the package from the shelf Moulin teaches in [0006] that the state of the art acknowledges using a fork to both pick and place objects on shelves by moving the fork underneath the object to be picked or placed. In combination with Sun, Sun’s distal end portion support rods, similar to forks, would be used in the manner acknowledged by Moulin to be commonplace. Moulin further teaches in [0045]-[0049] the actual retrieval of a bin from a shelf using a sliding tray.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the system of Sun, to position the distal end portion of the actuatable elongate member for retrieval of the package from the shelf, as taught by Moulin, because as Moulin acknowledges in [0006] this method is widely known and conventional.
11. Regarding claim 2,
Sun in view of Moulin teaches the limitations of claim 1 and also:
wherein the actuator is configured to cause the actuatable elongate member to move substantially along the first dimension only after the actuator has caused the rail to rotate and the actuatable elongate member to move relative to the rail substantially along the second dimension.Sun discloses this sequence of movements, rotation, vertical, and horizontal, in C6/L64-C7/L18.
12. Regarding claim 3,
Sun in view of Moulin teaches the limitations of claim 1 and also:
wherein the actuatable elongate member has a centerline substantially along the first dimension, the rail has a centerline substantially along the second dimension.The claimed centerlines of vertical guide rods (rails) 223 and driving mechanism 25 can be seen in fig. 2. All three-dimensional objects have center lines in all three dimensions, but we take applicant’s “centerline” to mean either an axis of symmetry or an elongated shape in the given dimension.
13. Regarding claim 4,
Sun in view of Moulin teaches the limitations of claim 1 and also:
wherein the signal is associated with receipt of the package, and the shelf is an access shelf (pallet 21: fig. 2) associated with one of (1) the elevator having the range of motion configured to access the unmanned vehicle portal, or (2) the portal through which packages can be received and delivered, the system further comprising: a plurality of shelves (114: fig. 3) configured to be associated with the package repository, the actuator configured to automatically cause, in response to the signal, the rail and the actuatable elongate member, collectively, to transfer the package from the access shelf to one of a first shelf from the plurality of shelves, or the other of the elevator or the portal.Sun discloses the package receipt signal in the form of instructions in C1/L32-52. In this claim we select Sun’s pallet 21 as the claimed “access shelf”, which being elevatable to the level of the delivery drone per C1/L32-52, satisfies both applicants’ options (1) and (2). Any of Sun’s locker receiving portions 114 may be mapped to the first shelf of the plurality of shelves to which the package is delivered. Among the options provided in the final lines of this claim, Sun discloses the use of its sorting system 2 in fig. 2, comprising as actuators a lifting mechanism and first and second driving mechanisms, to place the received package on one of its plurality of shelves in C6/L64-C7/L18 and C8/L44-67.
14. Regarding claim 5,
Sun in view of Moulin teaches the limitations of claim 1 and also:
wherein the shelf is an access shelf (pallet 21: fig. 2) associated with one of (1) the elevator having the range of motion configured to access the unmanned vehicle portal, or (2) the portal through which packages can be received and delivered, the system further comprising: a plurality of shelves (114: fig. 3) disposed in one of a cylindrical pattern or an arc pattern at a substantially common distance from the rail.Sun discloses for option (2) a plurality of shelves 114 in a cylindrical pattern or arc at a fixed radial distance from the rails in figs. 1-3. As can be seen from fig. 1, the overall layout of Sun’s system is generally cylindrical and the locker sections shown in detail in figs. 2-3 form arcs.
15. Regarding claim 6,
Sun in view of Moulin teaches the limitations of claim 1 and also:
wherein the shelf is an access shelf associated (pallet 21: fig. 2) with one of (1) the elevator having the range of motion configured to access the unmanned vehicle portal, or (2) the portal through which packages can be received and delivered, the system further comprising: a plurality of shelves (114: fig. 3) that includes a first shelf, a second shelf, a third shelf and a fourth shelf, the first shelf and the second shelf are disposed at a first angular position with respect to the rail and a first radial distance from the rail, the first shelf being disposed above the second shelf, the third shelf and the fourth shelf disposed at a second angular position with respect to the rail and a second radial distance from the rail, the third shelf being disposed above the fourth shelf, the first angular position is different from the second angular position, the first radial distance being substantially equal to the second radial distance.In effect, for option (2) applicant claims at least two shelf rows at different heights with multiple positions around an arc or a circle, all with a common radius. Sun discloses a plurality of shelves 114 in figs. 2-3 matching the requirements of option (2) with respect to radial distance, angular position, and vertical disposition.
16. Regarding claim 9,
Sun in view of Moulin teaches the limitations of claim 1 and also:
wherein: the signal includes an indication of delivery of the package and is received from an unmanned vehicle, the shelf (any of 114: fig. 3) is associated with the package repository, and the actuator is configured to further automatically cause, in response to the signal, the actuatable elongate member to retrieve the package from the shelf and the actuatable elongate member and the rail to collectively transfer the package to one of the elevator or to the unmanned vehicle portal (4: fig. 1).Sun teaches in C11/L4-20 that as an alternative to delivering a package to a shelf of a storage locker, the package may also be delivered to an unmanned vehicle garage 4. Though unnumbered, it is plain from fig. 1 garage 4 must comprise a portal to the main body of the structure.
17. Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun in view of Moulin and further in view of Miyazaki et al., JP 2019098458 (hereinafter Miyazaki).
Sun in view of Moulin teaches the limitations of claim 1 but not:
wherein the actuator is configured to position the distal end portion of the actuatable elongate member beneath an upper surface of the shelf when the distal end portion of the actuatable elongate member is in the extended position so that the distal end portion of the actuatable elongate member is positioned to lift the package from the shelf.Sun does not disclose positioning its distal end portion below the shelf prior to lifting a package from a shelf.
Miyazaki, an invention in the field of robotics, teaches:
wherein the actuator is configured to position the distal end portion of the actuatable elongate member beneath an upper surface of the shelf when the distal end portion of the actuatable elongate member is in the extended position so that the distal end portion of the actuatable elongate member is positioned to lift the package from the shelf.Miyazaki teaches this positioning in [0023], reciting “Conversely, when removing a workpiece W from the work shelf, the robot hand 10 moves from below to above the work shelf”. In combination with Sun and Moulin, we make use of Miyazaki’s method of manipulating a robotic fork.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the system of Sun and Moulin by wherein the actuator is configured to position the distal end portion of the actuatable elongate member beneath an upper surface of the shelf when the distal end portion of the actuatable elongate member is in the extended position so that the distal end portion of the actuatable elongate member is positioned to lift the package from the shelf, as taught by Miyazaki, because Miyazaki’s method is compatible with the use of a fork to lift articles and because Sun’s distal end portion is forklike and could use the same method as Miyazaki.
18. Claims 10-11, 13, and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun in view of Miyazaki.
19. Regarding claim 10,
Sun discloses:
A method, comprising: rotating a rail (any of the guide rods 223: fig. 2) from a first position to a second position along a substantially rotational range of motion, the rotating being automatically initiated in response to receipt of a signal indicative of one of delivery of a package or receipt of a package; Sun discloses rotation of the guide rods in C7/L19-33. All objects that rotate at all must at least be able to rotate between a first and some second position. Sun discloses the package receipt signal in the form of instructions in C1/L32-52.
moving an actuatable elongate member (driving mechanism 25: fig. 2) substantially along a first dimension from a retracted position to an extended position, the actuatable elongate member being coupled to the rail via a translational joint (sliding components 241: fig. 2) and having a distal end portion (pallet supports 251-252: fig. 2), the moving the actuatable elongate member substantially along the first dimension being automatically initiated in response to receipt of the signal;Sun discloses in C6/L64-C7/L18 that a lifting mechanism 23 moves a second driving mechanism 25 in a first vertical dimension and that the second driving mechanism moves an assembly including a fixedly coupled supports 251-252 in a second horizontal dimension. We consider the claimed extended position to be one in which the package can be delivered to a locker per C8/L44-67 as for this delivery the driving mechanism must move adjacent to the locker system 11 at the end of its guide rail, and the retracted position to be one in which the package is received from the delivering drone via an elevator or lifting device. The instructions (signal) of C1/L32-52 motivate the operation of Sun’s system.
and moving the actuatable elongate member relative to the rail substantially along a second dimension that is different from the first dimension, the moving the actuatable elongate member substantially along the second dimension being automatically initiated in response to receipt of the signal, the rotating the rail, the moving the actuatable elongate member substantially along the first dimension, and the moving the actuatable elongate member substantially along the second dimension, collectively, [positioning the distal end portion of the actuatable elongate member beneath an upper surface of a shelf] (locker receiving portions 114: fig. 3) associated with one of (1) an elevator (lifting mechanism 23: fig. 2) having a range of motion configured to access an unmanned vehicle portal (drone landing pad 31: fig. 1 with channel per C5/L15-27), (2) a portal through which packages can be received and delivered (locker baffles 113: fig. 3), or (3) a package repository (locker system 11: fig. 2).Sun discloses these steps in C6/L64-C7/L18 regarding the movement of the “actuatable elongate member” and in C8/L44-67 regarding the delivery of a parcel to a shelf of the locker system. However, Sun does not disclose the italicized portion of the limitation, which is addressed immediately below.
Sun does not disclose:
positioning the distal end portion of the actuatable elongate member beneath an upper surface of a shelfWhile Sun has the capability through vertical movement to perform this positioning, it does not disclose the method step explicitly.
Miyazaki, an invention in the field of robotics, teaches:
positioning the distal end portion of the actuatable elongate member beneath an upper surface of a shelfMiyazaki teaches this positioning in [0023], reciting “Conversely, when removing a workpiece W from the work shelf, the robot hand 10 moves from below to above the work shelf”. In combination with Sun, we make use of Miyazaki’s method of manipulating a robotic fork.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the system of Sun by positioning the distal end portion of the actuatable elongate member beneath an upper surface of a shelf, as taught by Miyazaki, because Miyazaki’s method is compatible with the use of a fork to lift articles and because Sun’s distal end portion is forklike and could use the same method as Miyazaki.
20. Regarding claim 11,
Sun in view of Miyazaki teaches the limitations of claim 10 and also:
wherein the moving the actuatable elongate member relative to the rail substantially along the second dimension is at a first time period, the method further comprising: moving, at a second time period subsequent the first time period, the actuatable elongate member relative to the rail substantially along the second dimension from the second position to a third position above the second position, the moving the actuatable elongate member at the second time period being automatically initiated in response to receipt of the signal.Sun discloses this sequence, first vertical movement and then horizontal movement, in C6/L64-C7/L18. Per C1/L32-52, this action in response to receipt of a signal in the form of instructions.
21. Regarding claim 12,
Sun in view of Miyazaki teaches the limitations of claim 11 and also:
wherein the shelf is a first shelf, the method further comprising: moving, at a third time period during or after the second time period and automatically in response to receipt of the signal, the actuatable elongate member substantially along the first dimension from the extended position to the retracted position; and rotating, at a fourth time period during or after the third time period and automatically in response to receipt of the signal, the rail from the second position to one of the first position or a third position different from the first position and the second position, the third position being radially aligned with a second shelf associated with another of (1) the elevator having the range of motion configured to access the unmanned vehicle portal, (2) the portal through which packages can be received and delivered, or (3) the package repository.In effect, this method claims the repetition of two low-level operations with an intermediate step of retracting the actuatable elongate member between the operations, as having moved to a second position, the system either returns to the first position or moves on to a third position. While Sun discloses in C6/L64-C7/L18 and C8/L44-67 an operation comprising a rotation, vertical movement, and a horizontal extension of an actuatable elongate member moving from a first to a second position (applicant’s options (2) and (3)), it does not explicitly disclose an intermediate retraction step. We hold this undisclosed step to be obvious without requiring another teaching reference per the rationale below.
Sun teaches the missing element of the limitations:
wherein the shelf is a first shelf, the method further comprising: moving, at a third time period during or after the second time period and automatically in response to receipt of the signal, the actuatable elongate member substantially along the first dimension from the extended position to the retracted position; and rotating, at a fourth time period during or after the third time period and automatically in response to receipt of the signal, the rail from the second position to one of the first position or a third position different from the first position and the second position, the third position being radially aligned with a second shelf associated with another of (1) the elevator having the range of motion configured to access the unmanned vehicle portal, (2) the portal through which packages can be received and delivered, or (3) the package repository.Sun discloses in C6/L64-C7/L18 and C8/L44-67 the transfer of a package through its system, the operation comprising the extension of an “actuatable elongate member” aligned with a destination shelf (applicant’s second position) in a locker system. It is clear that Sun’s method begins with its member in a retracted position because the method extends it. In order to repeat this procedure, either at the original first position or another third position, the member must plainly be retracted.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the method of Sun in view of Moulin, wherein, wherein the shelf is a first shelf, the method further comprising: moving, at a third time period during or after the second time period and automatically in response to receipt of the signal, the actuatable elongate member substantially along the first dimension from the extended position to the retracted position; and rotating, at a fourth time period during or after the third time period and automatically in response to receipt of the signal, the rail from the second position to one of the first position or a third position different from the first position and the second position, the third position being radially aligned with a second shelf associated with another of (1) the elevator having the range of motion configured to access the unmanned vehicle portal, (2) the portal through which packages can be received and delivered, or (3) the package repository, as taught by Sun, because the repetition of commonplace low-level operations is routine in all commercial and industrial arts, and because the not-explicitly-disclosed retraction step is an obvious necessity between repetitions of a method that requires an extension step.
22. Regarding claim 13,
Sun in view of Miyazaki teaches the limitations of claim 10 and also:
wherein the shelf is a first shelf (pallet 21: fig. 2), the moving the actuatable elongate member to the extended position is at a first time period, the method further comprising: retrieving the package from the first shelf at a second time period after the first time period and via the distal end portion of the actuatable elongate member, the retrieving being automatically initiated after the moving the actuatable elongate member to the extended position and in response to the signal; and depositing the package on a second shelf (114: fig. 3), the second shelf associated with one of (1) the elevator having the range of motion configured to access the unmanned vehicle portal, or (2) the portal through which packages can be received and delivered.Sun discloses the extension of its actuatable elongate member as part of delivery to a locker shelf in C6/L64-C7/L18 and C8/L44-67. In this case, the second shelf 114 is associated with a portal through which packages are received and delivered, namely baffle 113 of the locker to which 114 is a shelf. Sun’s member must extend before delivery can occur via its distal end portion. The delivery involves a transfer from the first shelf (pallet) to the second shelf (locker shelf).
23. Regarding claim 14,
Sun in view of Miyazaki teaches the limitations of claim 13 and also:
so that an upper surface of the distal end portion of the actuatable elongate member is disposed above an upper surface of the second shelf.Sun discloses in C8/L13-43 that the distal end portion (support rods) of the second driving mechanism enters a locker 114 to store a package; due to the structure of the locker, this can only happen if the distal end portion of the elongate member is disposed above an upper surface of the shelf.
However, Sun does not disclose all aspects of:
wherein the depositing is at a third time period and includes: rotating, automatically in response to receipt of the signal, the rail from the second position to one of the first position or a third position different from the first position and the second position; and moving, automatically in response to receipt of the signal, the actuatable elongate member substantially along the first dimension from the retracted position to the extended position [so that an upper surface of the distal end portion of the actuatable elongate member is disposed above an upper surface of the second shelf.]In effect, this method claims the repetition of two low-level operations with an intermediate step of retracting the actuatable elongate member between the operations, as having moved to a second position, the system either returns to the first position or moves on to a third position. While Sun discloses in C6/L64-C7/L18 and C8/L44-67 an operation comprising a rotation, vertical movement, and a horizontal extension of an actuatable elongate member moving from a first to a second position (applicant’s options (2) and (3)), it does not explicitly disclose an intermediate retraction step. We hold this undisclosed step to be obvious without requiring another teaching reference per the rationale below.
Sun teaches the missing element of the limitations:
wherein the shelf is a first shelf, the method further comprising: moving, at a third time period during or after the second time period and automatically in response to receipt of the signal, the actuatable elongate member substantially along the first dimension from the extended position to the retracted position; and rotating, at a fourth time period during or after the third time period and automatically in response to receipt of the signal, the rail from the second position to one of the first position or a third position different from the first position and the second position, the third position being radially aligned with a second shelf associated with another of (1) the elevator having the range of motion configured to access the unmanned vehicle portal, (2) the portal through which packages can be received and delivered, or (3) the package repository.Sun discloses in C6/L64-C7/L18 and C8/L44-67 the transfer of a package through its system, the operation comprising the extension of an “actuatable elongate member” aligned with a destination shelf (applicant’s second position) in a locker system. It is clear that Sun’s method begins with its member in a retracted position because the method extends it. In order to repeat this procedure, either at the original first position or another third position, the member must plainly be retracted.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the method of Sun, wherein, wherein the shelf is a first shelf, the method further comprising: moving, at a third time period during or after the second time period and automatically in response to receipt of the signal, the actuatable elongate member substantially along the first dimension from the extended position to the retracted position; and rotating, at a fourth time period during or after the third time period and automatically in response to receipt of the signal, the rail from the second position to one of the first position or a third position different from the first position and the second position, the third position being radially aligned with a second shelf associated with another of (1) the elevator having the range of motion configured to access the unmanned vehicle portal, (2) the portal through which packages can be received and delivered, or (3) the package repository, as taught by Sun, because the repetition of standard commercial and industrial processes is routine in all commercial and industrial arts, and because the untaught retraction step is an obvious necessity between repetitions of a method that requires an extension step.
24. Regarding claim 15,
Sun in view of Miyazaki teaches the limitations of claim 10 and also:
wherein the shelf is from a plurality of shelves disposed in one of a cylindrical pattern or an arc pattern at a substantially common distance from the rail.Sun discloses a plurality of shelves 114 in a cylindrical pattern or arc at a fixed radial distance from the rails in figs. 1-3. As can be seen from fig. 1, the overall layout of Sun’s system is generally cylindrical and the locker sections shown in detail in figs. 2-3 form arcs.
25. Regarding claim 16,
Sun in view of Miyazaki teaches the limitations of claim 10 and also:
wherein the rotating the rail and the moving the actuatable elongate member relative to the rail substantially along the second dimension are before the moving the actuatable elongate member substantially along the first dimension.Sun discloses this sequence in C6/L64-C7/L18.
26. Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun in view of Chen, et al., US 2022/0002084 (hereinafter Chen) and further in view of Sakai et al., US 4,815,007 (hereinafter Sakai).
27. Regarding claim 18,
Sun discloses:
A system, comprising: an elevator (lifting mechanism 23: fig. 2) having a first shelf (pallet 21: fig. 2) and a range of motion that is configured to access an unmanned vehicle portal (channel of drone landing pad 31: fig. 1, C5/L15-27),
the first shelf having a centerpoint substantially coaxial with a centerpoint of the opening of the unmanned vehicle portal;As can be seen in figs. 1-2, sorting system 21 is in the center of a generally cylindrical structure. Drone landing pad 31 is in the center of the structure at the top of the structure, and the sorting system with its lifting mechanism comprising a pallet (shelf) is directly beneath the landing pad, and thus they share substantially coaxial centerpoints.
a second shelf (114: fig. 3) associated with one of a portal through which packages can be received and delivered, or a package repository;As the shelves 114 are part of lockers with openings which are elements of a package repository, they satisfy both claimed disjuncts.
a rail (guide rails 223: fig. 2) disposed substantially vertically and having a rotational range of motion;
an actuatable elongate member (25: fig. 2) coupled to the rail and having a distal end portion (supports 251-252: fig. 2), the actuatable elongate member having a range of motion substantially along a first dimension between a retracted position and an extended position and having a range of motion relative to the rail and substantially along a second dimension that is different from the first dimension;Sun discloses in C6/L64-C7/L18 both horizontal motion (first dimension retraction and extension) and vertical motion (second dimension) movement of its driving mechanisms. The first driving mechanism moves vertically and supports the second driving mechanism which moves horizontally, carrying a pallet (shelf) which is used both to access the UAV landing pad above and to access storage shelves below.
However, Sun does not disclose all aspects of:
and an actuator (lifting mechanism 23, unnumbered first driving mechanism, second driving mechanism 25: fig. 21, C6/L64-C7/L18) configured to automatically cause, in a concurrent process, (1) the elevator to lower from a first position to a second position, and (2) the rail and the actuatable elongate member to cooperatively retrieve a second package from the second shelf and transfer the second package to a third shelf associated with the other of the package repository or the portal through which packages can be received and delivered.Sun discloses this general method and apparatus in C6/L64-C7/L18 and C8/L44-67, including a plurality of shelves 114 in fig. 3 to and from which it has the capability of transferring packages. The first shelf of the claim is pallet 21 and the second shelf is one of the plurality 114; presumably the third shelf is one of the plurality of 114 shelves as well. However, while Sun has the capability of delivering to any of its shelves, Sun does not explicitly disclose transferring a package from a second shelf to a third shelf. Moreover, though Sun has the capability for concurrent horizontal and vertical motion, Sun does not disclose this concurrency explicitly.
Chen, an invention in the field of intelligence warehousing, teaches one missing aspect of the limitation:
[and an actuator configured to automatically cause, in a concurrent process, (1) the elevator to lower from a first position to a second position, and (2) the rail and the actuatable elongate member to cooperatively retrieve a second package from the second shelf and] transfer the second package to a third shelf associated with the other of the package repository or the portal through which packages can be received and delivered.Chen teaches transfer from one shelf to another in [0047]. In combination with Sun, both these shelves would be shelves of the package repository.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the system of Sun, transfer the second package to a third shelf associated with the other of the package repository or the portal through which packages can be received and delivered, as taught by Chen, because a wide variety of warehousing and storage system tasks require transfer of goods from one storage shelf to another and this is a commonplace activity in storage and distribution facilities.
Sakai, an invention in the field of robotics, teaches the other missing aspect of the limitation:
configured to automatically cause, in a concurrent process, (1) the elevator to lower from a first position to a second position, and (2) the rail and the actuatable elongate member to cooperatively retrieve a second package from the second shelf [and transfer the second package to a third shelf associated with the other of the package repository or the portal through which packages can be received and delivered.]Sakai teaches the concurrent vertical and horizontal motion of a robot member in claim 18. In combination with Sun and Chen, we take only the teaching of concurrent movement and none of Sakai’s structure, because Sun’s structures are compatible with concurrent movement.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the system of Sun and Chen to automatically cause, in a concurrent process, (1) the elevator to lower from a first position to a second position, and (2) the rail and the actuatable elongate member to cooperatively retrieve a second package from the second shelf, as taught by Sakai, because concurrent vertical and horizontal movement saves time over serial movement and thus would be more efficient.
28. Regarding claim 19,
Sun in view of Chen and Sakai teaches the limitations of claim 18 and also:
further comprising a plurality of shelves disposed in one of a cylindrical pattern or an arc pattern at a substantially common distance from the rail, the plurality of shelves including the first shelf, the second shelf and the third shelf.Sun discloses a plurality of shelves 114 in a cylindrical pattern or arc at a fixed radial distance from the rails in figs. 1-3. As can be seen from fig. 1, the overall layout of Sun’s system is generally cylindrical and the locker sections shown in detail in figs. 2-3 with their plurality of shelves form arcs.
29. Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun in view of Chen and Sakai and further in view of Laczak et al., US 2023/0100169 (hereinafter Laczak).
Sun in view of Chen and Sakai teaches the limitations of claim 18 but not all aspects of:
wherein the rail is substantially vertical and the actuatable elongate member is substantially linear and disposed substantially perpendicular to the rail.Sun’s rails 223 are vertical but while the second driving mechanism 25 is horizontal and perpendicular to the rails, it is not “substantially linear”.
Laczak, an invention in the field of UAV parcel delivery, teaches the missing aspect of the limitation:
wherein the rail is substantially vertical and the actuatable elongate member (860: fig. 13) is substantially linear and disposed substantially perpendicular to the rail.Laczak’s axis guide and actuator 860 is substantially linear and is also perpendicular to the rail 840 along which it moves. Laczak’s 860 performs the same function as Sun’s second driving mechanism 25 and thus could replace it in combination with Sun.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the system of Sun, Chen, and Sakai, wherein the rail is substantially vertical and the actuatable elongate member is substantially linear and disposed substantially perpendicular to the rail, as taught by Laczak, because the reason Sun’s elongate member is not substantially linear is that it runs on a substantially linear track system and thus has no need itself to be long enough to reach a storage locker shelf. Laczak’s member requires no track and thus is a simpler and less costly design than Sun’s.
Allowable Subject Matter
30. Claims 8 and 17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: regarding dependent claims 8/1 and 17/10, while primary reference Sun is structurally compatible with the physical requirements of the claims and moreover has the capability of performing the claimed method, it does not explicitly disclose the matter of the claim. Various references teach concurrent rotation, vertical, and horizontal movement, and various others teach sequential rotation, vertical, and horizontal movement, but in the context of the other structures of the parent claims, concurrent rotation and vertical motion of applicant’s actuatable elongate member prior to the non-concurrent horizontal movement of the member was neither found, nor taught, nor fairly suggested by the prior art of record.
Conclusion
31. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2020/0002094 teaches a similar system to reference Sun and applicant’s invention and could have been cited in some rejections in place of Sun. US 2021/0284450 also teaches aspects of transfer of goods from a drone to a storage system and could likewise have been cited in rejection of certain claims.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAURENCE RAPHAEL BROTHERS whose telephone number is (703)756-1828. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 0830-1700.
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, Ernesto Suarez can be reached at (571) 270-5565. 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.
/ERNESTO A SUAREZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3655
LAURENCE RAPHAEL BROTHERS
Examiner
Art Unit 3655A
/L.R.B./ Examiner, Art Unit 3655