Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-9, 11, 13-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dugat (US 2021/0380341) in view of Yao (CN 217707388) (previously cited).
With respect to claims 1, 2, 9 & 18, Dugat discloses an apparatus, comprising:
an actuatable member 104 having a distal end portion (indicated generally as 116 in FIG. 1), an actuatable member-
having a range of motion, e.g. horizontal, along a first dimension between a retracted position, e.g. withdrawing from shelf 229a and an extended position (position of tines 210a IN FIG. 2A) and
having a range of motion, e.g. vertical range, along a second dimension that is different from a first dimension and that includes a first position and a second position; and
a tool 116, 210a (FIG. 2A), e.g. platform, disposed at a distal end portion of an actuatable member 104, a platform having a plurality of elongate tines 210a, e.g. elongate members, each elongate member from a plurality of elongate members being separated a non-zero distance amount from an adjacent elongate member from a plurality of elongate members,
a plurality of elongate members 210a sized and shaped to have a complementary fit with vertically and horizontally arranged shelf-like totes 108, 208 (FIGS. 1A-1D; FIG. 2A; para. 86) having a plurality of elongate receptacles 209a (FIG. 2A), e.g. openings,
an actuatable member 104 configured to remove a package 111 from a shelf by-
(para. 79, 135-139, FIGS. 1A-C, 9A, 9B1-9B2, 9C, 9D: extend member 104, insert platform 210a into openings 209a at a level below package) moving to an extended position and from a first position to a second, raised position, and
((para. 79, 135-139, FIGS. 1A-C, 9A, 9B1-9B2, 9C, 9D: raise platform 210a, pickup package 11, retract member 104) then moving from an extended position to a retracted position while in a second position.
Dugat's vertically and horizontally arranged toes 106, 108, 208 function as shelves insomuch as they support articles which are placed into and removed therefrom. However, Dugat does not explicitly disclose shelves. Dugat also discloses an actuable robot arm 104 that moves platform 210a in X, Y & Z directions, and does not disclose an actuatable elongate member, e.g. telescopic member.
Yao discloses-
an actuatable elongate member 321, 3211 (FIG. 6), e.g. telescopic, having a distal end portion (generally indicated as 322), an actuatable elongate member-
having a range of motion, e.g. horizontal, substantially along a first dimension between a retracted position, e.g. withdrawn, and an extended position and
having a range of motion, e.g. vertical range, substantially along a second dimension (indicated generally as rail 3141) that is different from a first dimension and that includes a first position and a second position; and
a plurality of shelves 110, e.g. first, second, third and fourth shelves, arranged vertically and horizontally in a lattice configuration.
Yao's storage lattice 110 is interpreted as shelves insomuch as they meet the standard dictionary definition. ("A thin flat usually long and narrow piece of material (such as wood) fastened horizontally (as on a wall) at a distance from the floor to hold objects." https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/shelf). Yao teaches that this system of package storage utilizing a telescopic member, e.g. actuable elongate member, with shelves improves on distribution of packages, reduces ground space and reduces opportunities for damage to an unmanned aerial vehicle due to human activities. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Dugat to include an actuable elongate member and first and second shelves, as taught by Yao, thereby improving package distribution, reducing floor area to store packages and reducing UAV damage.
With respect to claim 2, Dugat discloses multiple shelves from which packages are removed from or deposited thereon. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation claim 2 as presently constructed recites what the apparatus does. According to MPEP 2114-
“Apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does. A claim containing a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim."
In other words, Dugat in view of Yao disclose an actuable elongate member that supports a platform with a plurality of elongate members sized and shaped to have a complementary fit with elongate openings of first and second shelves, wherein the platform extends, retracts, raises and lowers the platform based on shelf location and whether picking up a package from a shelf or dropping off a package at a shelf. Thus, under MPEP 2114 Dugat in view of Yao discloses the invention of claim 2.
With respect to claim 3, Dugat does not disclose a rail, an actuatable elongate member having a centerline substantially along a first dimension, and a rail having a centerline substantially along a second dimension.
Yao discloses-
a rail 3141 coupled to an actuatable elongate member 321, 3211 , an actuatable elongate member having a range of motion, e.g. vertical range, relative to a rail that includes a first position and a second position,
an actuatable elongate member 321, 3211 having a centerline substantially along a first dimension, e.g. horizontally, and
a rail 3141 having a centerline substantially along a second dimension, e.g. vertically.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Dugat to include a rail, an actuatable elongate member having a centerline substantially along a first dimension, and a rail having a centerline substantially along a second dimension, as taught by Yao, thereby improving package distribution, reducing floor area to store packages and reducing UAV damage.
With respect to claims 4, 5, 6 & 14, Dugat's FIG. 2A (reproduced below) discloses that-
each elongate opening 209a from a plurality of elongate openings is defined by a first side wall for that elongate opening, a second side wall for that elongate opening and a bottom wall 222a for that elongate opening disposed between a first side wall for that elongate opening and a second side wall for that elongate opening.
Reciting the "operation" of claimed structure or configuring claimed structure for particular functions (see respectively lines 6-10 of claim 5, lines 6-14 of claim 6 & lines 4-19) of claim 14) is providing the apparatus does, and is provided little patentable weight. According to MPEP 2114-
“Apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does. A claim containing a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim."
In other words, Dugat in view of Yao disclose an actuable elongate member that moves a platform to enter below the top end of first and second wall (Dugat FIG. 2A), e.g. below the top ends, elevate to pick up a package supported on the shelf and retract the platform with the package supported thereon. Similarly, Dugat's elongate member moves a platform to enter above the top end of first and second wall, e.g. above the top ends, lower to a level wherein the platform is below the top ends of the walls, place a package on a shelf and retract the platform leaving the package setting on the shelf. Thus, Dugat's apparatus is configured to perform the steps or functions recited in claims 5, 6 & 14
[AltContent: textbox (Second side wall)][AltContent: textbox (First side wall)]
PNG
media_image1.png
178
282
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 7, Dugat discloses first and second totes that are stacked into a vertical and horizontal framework onto which articles are removed from and placed thereon. Yao discloses first and second shelves as shown in the rejection of claim 1. And, Dugat discloses second shelves 108, 208 (FIGS. 1A-1D; FIG. 2A; para. 86) having a plurality of elongate openings 209a, each elongate opening is defined by a first side wall (see rejection of claim 4 above) for that elongate opening, a second side wall for that elongate opening and a bottom wall for that elongate opening disposed between a first side wall for that elongate opening and a second side wall for that elongate opening. With respect to "configuring" an elongate member to unload packages from a second shelf Dugat's elongate member 210a is shorter in height than the height of the walls of the shelves. Consequently, members 210a are configured to move to a first position in which members 210a are below an upper edge of a first side wall, an upper edge of a second side wall and an upper edge of a bottom wall for each elongate opening from a plurality of elongate openings for the second shelf.
With respect to claim 8, Dugat discloses a first, second, third and fourth shelf-like totes which support packages placed thereon or removed therefrom. Dugat's shelf-like totes includes a plurality of openings 209a. Dugat does not explicitly disclose shelves or a rail. Yao discloses-
a rail 3141 coupled to an actuatable elongate member 321, 3211 , an actuatable elongate member having a range of motion, e.g. vertical range, relative to a rail that includes a first position and a second position,
an actuatable elongate member 321, 3211 having a centerline substantially along a first dimension, e.g. horizontally,
a rail 3141 having a centerline substantially along a second dimension, e.g. vertically, and
a storage lattice 110 interpreted as shelves insomuch as they meet the standard dictionary definition. ("A thin flat usually long and narrow piece of material (such as wood) fastened horizontally (as on a wall) at a distance from the floor to hold objects." https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/shelf), wherein lattice 110 includes first, second, third and fourth shelves.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Dugat a rail and shelves, as taught by Yao, thereby improving package distribution, reducing floor area to store packages and reducing UAV damage.
With respect to claims 11 & 13, Applicant is respectfully reminded that the material or article worked upon by the apparatus does not limit apparatus claims. See MPEP 2115. The type or size or shape of the article manipulated by the claimed apparatus is given little patentable weight. In this case, FIGS. 9A, 9B of Dugat disclose an apparatus with first and second shelves for use with packages 111 having different shapes and sizes. Consequently, Dugat's apparatus could be configured for a first package disposed on a first shelf, a second package disposed on a second shelf, wherein a size of a first package differs from a size of the second package. And, Dugat's apparatus can lift a first package from a first shelf at a first time, an actuatable member configured to lift a second package from the second shelf at a second time different from a first time.
With respect to claims 15 & 19, Dugat discloses a lower position is a first lower position, an upper position is a first upper position and an actuatable member configured to move a package, from a shelf from a plurality of shelves to another location 108, 208 (FIGS. 1A-1D; FIG. 2A; para. 86). Dugat does not disclose an access shelf. Yao discloses an actuatable member 321, 3211 configured to move a package, from a first, second, third and/or fourth shelves 110 to an access shelf 420. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Dugat to include an access shelf, as taught by Yao, thereby improving package distribution, reducing floor area to store packages and reducing UAV damage.
With respect to claim 16, Dugat does not disclose a portal. Yao discloses a portal 414 (or alternatively portal 130) through which packages can be received and delivered. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Dugat to include either an elevator having a range of motion that includes access to an unmanned vehicle portal or a portal through which packages can be received and delivered, as taught by Yao, thereby improving package distribution, reducing floor area to store packages and reducing UAV damage.
With respect to claim 17, Dugat discloses-
moving an actuatable member 104 to an extended position (FIG. 2A) and a lower position to cause a plurality of elongate members 210a of a platform to complementarily fit within a plurality of elongate openings 209a of a shelf-like tote 208a, a platform coupled to a distal end portion of an actuatable member 104, a package being disposed on a shelf; and
moving (para. 76), after a moving an actuatable member to an extended position and a lower position, an actuatable member from a lower position to an upper position, e.g. raising, to cause a plurality of elongate members of a platform to be removed from a plurality of elongate openings of a shelf and to lift a package from a shelf.
With respect to claim 20, Applicant is respectfully reminded that to be entitled to patentable weight in method claims, the structural limitations recited therein must affect the method in a manipulative sense, and not to amount to the mere claiming of a use of a particular structure. See Ex parte Pfeiffer, 135 USPQ 31 (1961). For example, the limitation "a portal through which packages can be received and delivered" is not structurally equivalent in a method claim to –delivering and/or receiving packages through a portal--. Dugat does not disclose a portal. Yao discloses a portal 414 (or alternatively portal 130) through which packages can be received and delivered. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Dugat to include either an elevator having a range of motion that includes access to an unmanned vehicle portal or a portal through which packages can be received and delivered, as taught by Yao, thereby improving package distribution, reducing floor area to store packages and reducing UAV damage.
Claim(s) 10 & 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dugat in view of Yao and further in view of Geraci (US 5,143,193).
Fig. 1A of Dugat appears to disclose a plurality of shelf-like totes arranged in an arc-shaped wall 106. Dugat does not explicitly disclose shelves arranged in arc pattern, or first, second, third and fourth shelves. Geraci discloses a plurality of compartments 14 (FIGS. 5, 6), e.g. shelves, wherein compartments 14 are disposed in arc pattern at a substantially common and radial distance from a vertical track 46, e.g. rail. Geraci's first and second shelves disposed at a first location and a first radial distance from a rail, a first shelf being disposed above a second shelf, and third and fourth shelves disposed at a second location and a second radial distance from a rail, a third shelf being disposed above a fourth shelf, a first location is different from a second location, a first radial distance being substantially equal to a second radial distance. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Dugat to include first, second, third and fourth shelves arranged according to claim 12 and disposed in arc pattern at a substantially common distance from a rail, as taught by Geraci, thereby enabling variable dispensing and intake of various articles while also offering easy access by a user.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAUL J RODRIGUEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-7097. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:30-3:00.
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, Joseph Thomas can be reached at 571-272-8004. 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.
/GREGORY ADAMS/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3652