DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 12-14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "each motor-roller controller" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the conveyor” in line 4, it is unclear to which element this refers.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the serial topology of the wired motor-roller controllers" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "each motor-roller controller" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "at least one of the motor roller controllers" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "each motor-roller controller" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 14 recites “the motor-roller control port” in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshikawa et al. US 2009/0099686 in view of Delaney, III et al. US 7,705,742.
Yoshikawa discloses a conveyor system for conveying products, for instance goods, packages and the like, comprising:
(Re claim 1) “a first motor roller within a first conveyor zone and at least one first motor-roller
controller that controls the first motor roller within the first conveyor zone” (I11 figure 1, para 0048) a local controller is inherent. “a second motor roller within a second conveyor zone and at least one second motor roller controller that controls the second motor roller within the second conveyor zone” (I12 figure 1, para 0048) a local controller is inherent. “a merger/diverter arranged for merging products into a line-up of the products along the conveyor zones and/or for sorting out products from the line-up of the products and spatially arranged between the first and the second conveyor zones and at least one merger/diverter controller that controls the merger/diverter” (J6 figure 1, para 0048) a local controller is inherent. “the first and second motor roller controllers each have a wired I/O port and are connected via the wired I/O port with a central controller” (I12, I11, 300 figure 1,3, ‘wired’ para 0048). “the first and second motor roller controllers and the merger/diverter controller each have a wireless communication port” (I12, I11, J6 figure 1, ‘wireless’ para 0048).
Yoshikawa does not disclose that at least the first and second motor roller controllers are wirelessly connected to each other and the merger/diverted controller via the wireless communication port to control a merge/divert operation.
Delaney teaches that at least the first and second motor roller controllers are wirelessly connected to each other and the … controller via the wireless communication port to control a … operation (“wireless communications can be provided between the zone modules” col 6 lines 10-26, claim 16)
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to modify the system of Yoshikawa to include that at least the first and second motor roller controllers are wirelessly connected to each other and the merger/diverted controller via the wireless communication port to control a merge/divert operation because it allows improved cooperation between the conveyor segments
(Re claim 2) “the first motor roller controller and the second motor roller controller are arranged downstream of a main conveying direction” (I10, I11, I12 figure 1).
(Re claim 3) “the merger/diverter controller comprises a wired I/O port and is connected via the
wired I/O port with the central controller” (J6 figure 1, para 0048).
(Re claim 4) “at least a third motor roller controller controls a third motor roller of a third conveyor zone, wherein the third conveyor zone is spatially arranged at the merger diverter” (I7 figure 1).
(Re claim 5) “at least a fourth motor roller controller controls a fourth motor roller of a fourth
conveyor zone, wherein the fourth conveyor zone is spatially arranged at the merger diverter” (I16 figure 1).
(Re claim 6) “the third and/or fourth motor roller controllers control motor rollers of respective conveyor zones that have a conveying direction that differs from the main conveying direction” (I10,I7,I16 figure 1).
(Re claim 7) “the third and/or fourth motor roller controllers control motor rollers of respective conveyor zones such that the conveying directions of the conveyor zones are upstream or downstream of the merger/diverter” (I7,J6,I16 figure 1).
(Re claim 8) “at least one of the motor roller controllers and the merger/diverter controller are arranged to wirelessly exchange control signals for a merge/divert operation within the merger/diverter, in particular the first motor roller controller, the second motor roller controller, the merger/diverter controller and at least the third motor roller controller are arranged to wirelessly exchange control signals for a merge/divert operation within the merger/diverter” As modified by Delaney all of the controllers which are adjacent to one another would be in communication to cooperate in transfer operations.
(Re claim 9) “the first motor roller controller and the second motor roller controller are connected to the central controller via separated wired serial signal bus connections” (‘wired … communication channels’ para 0048).
(Re claim 10) “the merger/diverter controller is connected to the central controller via a wired serial signal bus connection different from the wired serial signal bus connection of the first motor roller controller and/or the second motor roller controller” (‘wired … communication channels’ para 0048).
(Re claim 11) “the first motor roller controller, the second motor roller controller, the merger/diverter controller and at least the third motor roller controller are arranged to exchange control signals for a merge/divert operation within the merger/diverter via their respective wired serial bus connections” (‘wired … communication channels’ para 0048).
(Re claim 12) Yoshikawa does not disclose that each motor-roller controller is connected via a motor-roller control port to at least one motor-roller along the conveyor and that the serial topology of the wired motor-roller controllers along the wired signal bus and the serial topology of the motor-rollers along the conveyor correspond to each other.
Delaney teaches that each motor-roller controller is connected via a motor-roller control port to at least one motor-roller along the conveyor and that the serial topology of the wired motor-roller controllers along the wired signal bus and the serial topology of the motor-rollers along the conveyor correspond to each other (180, 190,192,194,196 figure 1).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to modify they system of Yoshikawa to include that each motor-roller controller is connected via a motor-roller control port to at least one motor-roller along the conveyor and that the serial topology of the wired motor-roller controllers along the wired signal bus and the serial topology of the motor-rollers along the conveyor correspond to each other because it reduces the amount of wires needed.
(Re claim 13) “at least one of the motor roller controllers and/or the merger/diverter controller is connected via the I/O port and a wired serial signal bus to the central controller” (wired … communication channels’ para 0048).
(Re claim 14) Yoshikawa does not disclose that each wireless motor-roller controller is connected via the motor-roller control port to at least one motor-roller along the conveyor.
Delaney teaches that each wireless motor-roller controller is connected via the motor-roller control port to at least one motor-roller along the conveyor (‘cable … wireless’ col 6 lines 10-26).
(Re claim 15) “controlling the first motor roller of the first conveyor zone with the first motor-roller controller” (I11 figure 1). “controlling the second motor roller of the second conveyor zone with the second motor-roller controller” (I12 figure 1). “controlling the merger/diverter spatially arranged at the first and the second conveyor zones with the merger/diverter controller” (J6 figure 1). “a merger/diverter operation, involving at least the first motor roller, the second motor roller and the merger/diverter, is controlled using both a wired serial connection of at least the first and second motor roller controllers with a central controller “ (para 0048).
Yoshikawa does not disclose a wireless connection of at least the first and second motor roller controllers with the merger/diverter controller.
Delaney teaches a wireless connection of at least the first and second motor roller controllers with other controllers (“wireless communications can be provided between the zone modules” col 6 lines 10-26, claim 16).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. WO 2006/102691 and US 2021/0362194 disclose a multi zone merger/diverter system using wired or wireless communication. US 2016/0167888 and 2012/0175223 disclose wired and/or wireless communication between conveyor zones.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY R WAGGONER whose telephone number is (571)272-8204. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 5am-330pm.
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, Jacob Scott can be reached at 571-270-3415. 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.
TIMOTHY R. WAGGONER
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3655 B
/TIMOTHY R WAGGONER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3655
Prosecution Insights