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.
Claim Interpretation
4. Claims 1, 6, 9-14, 16, and 18-19 recite the term “enclosure”, which is limited in claim 1 to comprise or include a “transport assembly” (recited in claims 1-3, 6-8, 14-16, and 18-19) which transports articles through the enclosure. Neither of these terms is formally defined in the instant specification. In this office action we apply a broadest reasonable interpretation of “enclosure” as any structure whatsoever that can comprise or substantially enclose a transport assembly. This interpretation includes, for example, the housing of a track system such as an OHT, the body of a roller- or belt-based conveyor system, a dispensing unit, storage unit, or cabinet through which a conveyor system travels, and even the housing of an AGV or robotic cart used to transport articles. Similarly, the broadest reasonable interpretation of a “transport assembly” is any sort of device that effects transportation, including continuous conveyor systems and discrete vehicles as well those portions of vehicles responsible for transportation, e.g. the powered wheel assemblies comprised by AGVs. The enclosure’s “dispensing opening” recited in claims 1, 7-8, 16, and 18-19 is interpreted as any sort of opening whatsoever through which a prescription order or container of prescription orders could be dispensed, loaded, or unloaded. This includes, for example, a hole, door, gate, or passageway in the enclosure.
Examiner’s Note
5. The examiner would welcome an interview to clarify any of the various rejections seen below in order to expedite prosecution of the instant application.
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.
6. Claims 1-2, 4-7, 9, and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Henderson, et al., US 2014/0261058 (hereinafter Henderson) in view of Overskeid, et al., US 2005/0085941 (hereinafter Overskeid).
7. Regarding claim 1,
Henderson discloses:
A pharmacy order delivery and transport system ([0001]) comprising: an enclosure (872: fig. 56, [0284]);Henderson discloses multiple stations, subsystems, and embodiments of its transport system featuring a variety of different enclosures. Over the course of these rejections we cite primarily the enclosure 872 of fig. 56 which is the hull or housing of a horizontal track system. This track system appears in multiple embodiments and subsystems of Henderson’s in different combinations with cabinets, workstations, and other structures. It can be seen for example in figs. 19 and 23 as well as fig. 56. Where the track system is depicted as running through a cabinet or other enclosure and where the housing of the track fits into the housing of the cabinet, we consider the enclosure to include the cabinet as well as the track.
a transport assembly (track 880, carriers 870, 874: fig. 56) provided in the enclosure [and forming a continuous loop], the transport assembly movable through the enclosure and configured to transport a plurality of filled prescription orders (unnumbered packets hooked to carriers 870, 874, fig. 56; [0287]);While Henderson generally discloses the terms of this limitation, including the capability to return unneeded or expired medication to the source in [0287], it is unclear from Henderson whether the italicized “continuous loop” is present; this seems likely from its figures and from the nature of its track system, but it is not explicit, so we call out that particular limitation below to be addressed by a teaching reference.
a transport actuator configured to drive the transport assembly;Henderson discloses motorized rollers that may drive its cars in [0173] and that the cars themselves may be powered by motors in [0180], both of which we consider to be examples of the claimed transport actuators.
a dispensing opening (aperture related to 878: fig. 56) provided on the enclosure;The unnumbered dispensing opening of fig. 56 is the aperture through which vertical track 878 is connected to the horizontal track system in enclosure 872. The figure along with [0283]-[0287] shows that medicine containers can be dispensed through the opening via a tray 896 that travels along the vertical track.
and an electronic processor system coupled to the transport actuator and configured to receive a selection of a filled prescription order from the plurality of filled prescription orders for dispensing,Henderson discloses in [0242]-[0244] aspects of its computing and communication network which necessarily comprise an electronic processor system. Henderson discloses in [0232] that medicine ”overpacks” may be requested by a health care provider to be transported by its system.
determine a location of the filled prescription order on the transport assembly;Henderson discloses in [0120] that orders may be located on the transport assembly.
operate, using the transport actuator, the transport assembly to align the location of the filled prescription order with the dispensing opening, and dispense, via the dispensing opening, the filled prescription order.Henderson discloses this general method in fig. 56 and [0283]-[0287]. As seen in the figure and disclosed in the text, the transport assembly is aligned with the opening of vertical track 878 so a single pack of medicine can be dispensed via a tray 896 along the track of 878.
However, Henderson does not explicitly disclose:
and forming a continuous loop
Overskeid, an invention in the field of product transfer, teaches:
and forming a continuous loopOverskeid teaches a continuous loop transport assembly in fig. 1. In this combination, we incorporate Overskeid’s teaching of a loop into Henderson’s system without requiring any actual structure or systems from Overskeid, merely its topology.
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 Henderson, forming a continuous loop, as taught by Overskeid, because long experience over hundreds of years in article handling systems in a wide variety of arts shows that systems incorporating continuous loops of conveyors, rails, or tracks are efficient, effective, and convenient in many commercial and industrial facilities. Such loops can also convey carriers to all stations on a track and back to their source again without requiring independent movement of the carriers on a track.
8. Regarding claim 2,
Henderson in view of Overskeid teaches the limitations of claim 1 and also:
wherein the transport assembly includes a plurality of transport blocks connected together to form the continuous loop.Henderson discloses track sections in its [0191]-[0192] that we map to the claimed transport blocks. Overskeid discloses a track forming a continuous loop in its fig. 1.
9. Regarding claim 4,
Henderson in view of Overskeid teaches the limitations of claim 2 and also:
wherein the location of the filled prescription order corresponds to identification information of a transport block of the plurality of transport blocks used to store the filled prescription order.Henderson discloses the use of tags disposed around the track to identify locations in [0185] and [0274]. As its track is composed of track sections or transport blocks, these tags identify the transport block as claimed.
10. Regarding claim 5,
Henderson in view of Overskeid teaches the limitations of claim 2 and also:
wherein the filled prescription order is a first filled prescription order, and wherein the electronic processor system is further configured to: receive a selection of a second filled prescription order;Having disclosed the selection of a first order in [0185] and [0274], Henderson can repeat this method to select a second. It is conventional for any industrial process to be repeatable indefinitely.
determine a transport block of the plurality of transport blocks corresponding to the second filled prescription order; and relate the second filled prescription order with the transport block, wherein a location of the second filled prescription order corresponds to identification information of the transport block.Henderson discloses determining overpack and transport assembly transport locations in [0185] and teaches in [0274] that transport locations (“transport blocks”) may be tagged with location identifiers that can be scanned by the transport assembly so the system can determine location. Thus a second filled order (like all other orders conveyed by Henderson’s system) may be related to a transport block where the block’s identifier determines the order location.
11. Regarding claim 6,
Henderson in view of Overskeid teaches the limitations of claim 2 and also:
further comprising: a scanner (876: fig. 56) coupled to the enclosure and configured to identify a location of the transport assembly, wherein the location of the transport assembly corresponds to identification information of a transport block in front of the scanner, and wherein locations of the plurality of transport blocks are determined based on the location of the transport assembly.Henderson discloses the use of a scanner 876 coupled to enclosure 872 to identify a position of its car (transport assembly) in fig. 56 and [0287].
12. Regarding claim 7,
Henderson in view of Overskeid teaches the limitations of claim 1 and also:
wherein operating the transport assembly to align the location of the filled prescription order with the dispensing opening (aperture related to 878: fig. 56) includes operating the transport assembly such that the filled prescription order is directly above the dispensing opening.The unnumbered dispensing opening of fig. 56 is the aperture through which vertical track 878 is connected to the horizontal track system in enclosure 872. The figure along with [0283]-[0287] shows that medicine containers can be dispensed through the opening via a tray 896 that travels along the vertical track. In order to dispense medicine in this manner the transport assembly must be aligned with and above the dispensing opening .
13. Regarding claim 8,
Henderson in view of Overskeid teaches the limitations of claim 1 and also:
determine a location of the second filled prescription order on the transport assembly; Henderson discloses determining the location of an overpack containing prescription medicine in [0185] and [0274]. This determination can work for a first or a second order.
However, Henderson in view of Overskeid does not explicitly teach all aspects of these limitations, and so additional rationales for combining multiple disclosures of Henderson will be presented:
wherein the dispensing opening is a first dispensing opening and the filled prescription order is a first filled prescription order, further comprising: a second dispensing opening in communication with a return container,
wherein the dispensing opening is a first dispensing opening and the filled prescription order is a first filled prescription order, further comprising: a second dispensing opening in communication with a return container,
wherein the electronic processor system is configured to: determine that a second filled prescription order of the plurality of filled prescription orders is past a pick-up by date;
operate the transport assembly to align the location of the second filled prescription order with the second dispensing opening;
and return, via the second dispensing opening, the second filled prescription order to the return container.Regarding these limitations, while Henderson discloses all the requisite individual structures including a transport assembly in fig. 56 along with a method of dispensing medicine from the source to a destination nurse server workstation (fig. 50), and while the nurse server workstation is further disclosed to comprise a return slot 588 for returning medicine, the method of returning medicine between the workstation of fig. 50 and the transport assembly of fig. 56 is not explicitly disclosed. For this reason, rather than showing that the previous combination of Henderson and Overskeid teaches these limitations, we introduce a further combination with Henderson for which further combination rationales are cited.
Henderson in view of Overskeid further teaches via an additional combination:
wherein the dispensing opening is a first dispensing opening and the filled prescription order is a first filled prescription order, further comprising: a second dispensing opening (588: fig. 50) in communication with a return container (896, 870: fig. 56),Henderson discloses a second dispensing opening 588 in fig. 50 associated with the nurse server workstation, which is disclosed in [0283]-[0287] to be in communication with the transport assembly of fig. 56 cited above via its vertical track 878. Henderson does not explicitly disclose that the dispensing opening 588 of fig. 50 is in communication with the transport assembly via the track. However, given that the tray 896 of fig. 56 is configured to descend via track 878 bearing a medicine pack from above, and given that the tray must return from the nurse station below to the position depicted above regardless of whether it is carrying medicine, Henderson in view of Overskeid teaches the return of medicine deposited in opening 588 of fig. 50. In this combination, we consider the “return container” to either be the tray 896 or one of the carriers 870 of fig. 56 to which medicine would be returned via track 878 from the nurse server workstation below.
wherein the electronic processor system is configured to: determine that a second filled prescription order of the plurality of filled prescription orders is past a pick-up by date;Henderson discloses medicine expiration dates in [0104] and the determination of an allowed medicine retention period at above a storage temperature after which medicine must be returned in [0237]. Henderson moreover discloses the return of unneeded or unusable medicines in [0179], [0206] and [0231]. However, despite disclosing these separate elements, Henderson does not explicitly disclose the determination that a particular order is past its expiration or pick-up by date. We hold, however, that it would be obvious to perform this determination because Henderson discloses returning unusable or unneeded medicines and because expired medicines are a type of unusable medicine.
operate the transport assembly to align the location of the second filled prescription order with the second dispensing opening;In this extended combination we extend the transport assembly of fig. 56 to include track 878 and tray 896 which is transported along the track. Henderson discloses in [0283]-[0287] that the tray 896 carries medicine down to the nurse server workstation for dispensing. This constitutes alignment of the order with a dispensing opening in the workstation in fig. 50.
and return, via the second dispensing opening, the second filled prescription order to the return container.Henderson’s workstation embodiment of fig. 50 (“nurse server”) includes dispensing opening 588 (a return slot, see [0231]), and the workstation is disclosed to be in communication with the enclosure and assembly of fig. 56 in [0283]-[0287] via vertical track 878. Although it is not explicitly disclosed, we consider it obvious to use the return slot 588 of the nurse server workstation of fig. 50 to connect to the transport assembly of fig. 56 via track 878 in fig. 56. Returning medications to the central pharmacy source is disclosed in [0206] and [0231]. In this combination, we consider the “return container” to either be the tray 896 or one of the carriers 870 of fig. 56 to which medicine would be returned via track 878 from the nurse server workstation below.
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 Henderson and Overskeid, (i) wherein the dispensing opening is a first dispensing opening and the filled prescription order is a first filled prescription order, further comprising: a second dispensing opening in communication with a return container; (ii) wherein the electronic processor system is configured to: determine that a second filled prescription order of the plurality of filled prescription orders is past a pick-up by date; (iii) to operate the transport assembly to align the location of the second filled prescription order with the second dispensing opening; and (iv) return, via the second dispensing opening, the second filled prescription order to the return container, as also taught by Henderson. Regarding limitations (i), (iii), and (iv), these would have been obvious because Henderson a) discloses the requisite structures and method for performing the delivery of medicine from the transport assembly to the nurse server workstation, b) discloses that medicines may be returned from the nurse server workstation to the transport assembly (without explicitly specifying the precise mechanism for doing so), and c) the structures explicitly disclosed for transport in the first (dispensing) direction are suitable for use in transport in the second (return) direction. The motivation for returned unneeded or unwanted medication is plainly to avoid wastage of the medication and because even where medication is no longer usable, it may be more efficient to dispose of such medication in bulk at a central location. A person of ordinary skill in the art would therefore find it obvious to use Henderson’s system to return medicine in much the same manner that it was delivered. Regarding limitation (ii), because Henderson discloses medicine expiration dates and the return of unusable medicine to its dispensing source, it would likewise have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to return medicines whose expiration date has passed (i.e. whose pick-up by date has passed) using these structures and method.
14. Regarding claim 9,
Henderson in view of Overskeid teaches the limitations of claim 1 and also:
wherein the enclosure is configured to be coupled to a ceiling of a building.Henderson discloses in fig. 23 and [0157] that its transport device advances along a channel proximate to the ceiling which we map in this embodiment to the claimed enclosure. The track systems of fig. 56 and fig. 23 are similar (and we believe, identical) systems and thus are presumably both proximate to the ceiling as claimed.
15. Regarding claim 11,
Henderson in view of Overskeid teaches the limitations of claim 1 and also:
wherein the enclosure is made of modular sections.Henderson discloses in fig. 32 track section endcaps meant to assemble track sections together and discloses in [0191]-[0193] that its track may be composed of modular sections assembled together. Since the track sections of for example figs. 23 and fig. 56 comprise enclosures in the form of their integrated housings both the enclosures and the track sections are modular.
16. Regarding claim 12,
Henderson in view of Overskeid teaches the limitations of claim 11 and also:
wherein the modular sections include straight sections and bent sections.Henderson discloses straight and bent sections in [0192].
17. Regarding claim 13,
Henderson in view of Overskeid teaches the limitations of claim 1 but does not teach all aspects of:
wherein the enclosure includes a plurality of spaced apart doors to selectively provide access to an interior of the enclosure.The track enclosure 872 of fig. 56 previously cited as the claimed enclosure in parent claims does not include a plurality of regularly spaced doors. However, as Henderson teaches other enclosures with such doors, we present an obviousness rationale for a further combination below.
Henderson in view of Overskeid further teaches via an additional combination:
wherein the enclosure includes a plurality of spaced apart doors (546: fig. 46) to selectively provide access to an interior of the enclosure.Henderson discloses a plurality of regularly spaced doors in the enclosure of fig. 46, depicting a nurse server workstation. Because Henderson’s fig. 46 discloses a nurse server workstation with a plurality of regularly spaced doors and because the workstation has a track structure integrated at its top, we consider the combination of fig. 46 and fig. 56 (disclosing a similar track structure in close detail) to be obvious in view of paragraphs [0283]-[0287], which discloses the connection of the transport assembly of fig. 56 to a nurse server such as that of fig. 46. Thus, the system of Henderson and Overskeid cited in rejection of parent claim 1 in this further combination teaches the claimed features of a plurality of regularly spaced apart doors giving access to the combined enclosure of figs. 46 and 56.
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 Henderson and Overskeid, wherein the enclosure includes a plurality of spaced apart doors to selectively provide access to an interior of the enclosure, as taught by Henderson because providing doors to an enclosure that dispenses medicine makes it convenient to access and inspect the medicine being dispensed, because providing a plurality of such doors allows for both the simultaneous and selective access to particular medicines being delivered to different patients or customers, and because regularly spacing the doors is a routine design feature for cabinetry.
18. Claims 3 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Henderson in view of Overskeid and further in view of Norrie; Lyle W., US 4,838,036 (hereinafter Norrie).
19. Regarding claim 3,
Henderson in view of Overskeid teaches the limitations of claim 2, but not:
wherein the transport assembly includes a track, wherein each transport block of the plurality of transport blocks includes a transport hook and a wheel, and wherein the wheel is configured to move along the track.While Henderson discloses modular transport blocks as transport sections in [0191]-[0192], and also discloses hooks for transport in figs. 54 and 56, it does not disclose the claimed wheels and hooks together as part of transport blocks.
Norrie, an invention in the field of conveying, teaches:
wherein the transport assembly includes a track (26: fig. 2), wherein each transport block of the plurality of transport blocks includes a transport hook and a wheel, and wherein the wheel is configured to move along the track.Norrie teaches unnumbered hooks and wheels that are plainly visible in its fig. 2. Similar arrangements can be found in a wide variety of conveyor and Overhead Hoist Transport (OHT) art. In combination with Henderson, Norrie would supply yet an additional transport assembly embodiment to supplement those disclosed by Henderson.
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 Henderson and Overskeid, wherein the transport assembly includes a track, wherein each transport block of the plurality of transport blocks includes a transport hook and a wheel, and wherein the wheel is configured to move along the track, because arrangements of hooks and wheels on tracks for transporting items are commonplace and of long standing in many fields of conveyor art including modern Overhead Hoist Transport (OHT) systems.
20. Regarding claim 14,
Henderson discloses:
A pharmacy order delivery and transport system ([0001]) comprising: an enclosure (872: fig. 56, [0284]);Henderson discloses multiple embodiments of its transport system with many different enclosures of different types. Over the course of these rejections we cite primarily the enclosure 872 of fig. 56 which is the hull or housing of a horizontal track system. This track system appears in multiple embodiments and subsystems of Henderson’s in different combinations with cabinets, carts, and other structures. It can be seen for example in figs. 19 and 23 as well as fig. 56. Where the track system is depicted as running through a cabinet or other enclosure and where the housings of the track fit into the housing of the cabinet, we consider the enclosure to include the cabinet as well as the track.
and a transport assembly (horizontal track 880, carriers 870, 874: fig. 56) provided in the enclosure and configured to transport a plurality of filled prescription orders (unnumbered packets hooked to carriers 870, 874, fig. 56; [0287]), the transport assembly including a track (880: fig. 56) extending continuously throughout the enclosure,
and a transport actuator configured to drive the plurality of transport blocks along the track.Henderson discloses rollers that may drive its cars in [0173] and that the cars themselves may be powered by motors in [0180], both of which we consider to be examples of the claimed transport actuators.
However, Henderson does not fully disclose:
a plurality of transport blocks connected together to form a continuous loop,It is unclear from Henderson whether a continuous loop is present; this seems likely from its figures, but it is not explicit.
each transport block of the plurality of transport blocks including a transport hook and a wheel configured to move along the track, the transport hook configured to receive a storage bag containing a filled prescription order of the plurality of filled prescription orders, While Henderson discloses modular transport blocks as transport sections in [0191]-[0192], and also discloses hooks for transport in figs. 54 and 56, it does not disclose the claimed wheels and hooks together as part of transport blocks.
Overskeid, an invention in the field of product transfer, teaches:
a plurality of transport blocks connected together to form a continuous loopOverskeid teaches a continuous loop transport assembly in fig. 1. In this combination, we incorporate Overskeid’s teaching of a loop into Henderson’s system without requiring any actual structure or systems from Overskeid, merely its topology.
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 Henderson, a plurality of transport blocks connected together to form a continuous loop, as taught by Overskeid, because long experience over hundreds of years in article handling systems in a wide variety of arts shows that systems incorporating continuous loops of conveyors, rails, or tracks are efficient, effective, and convenient in many commercial and industrial facilities.
Norrie, an invention in the field of conveying, teaches:
each transport block of the plurality of transport blocks including a transport hook and a wheel configured to move along the track, the transport hook configured to receive a storage bag containing a filled prescription order of the plurality of filled prescription orders,Norrie teaches unnumbered hooks and wheels that are plainly visible in its fig. 2. Similar arrangements can be found in a wide variety of conveyor and Overhead Hoist Transport (OHT) art.
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 Henderson and Overskeid, wherein the transport assembly includes a track, wherein each transport block of the plurality of transport blocks includes a transport hook and a wheel, and wherein the wheel is configured to move along the track, because arrangements of hooks and wheels on tracks for transporting items are commonplace and of long standing in many fields of conveyor art including modern Over Head Transport (OHT) systems.
21. Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Henderson in view of Overskeid and further in view of Papp, et al., US 2011/0039013 (hereinafter Papp).
Henderson in view of Overskeid teaches the limitations of claim 1, but not:
wherein the enclosure is made of clear or translucent materials.Henderson does not teach translucent or transparent enclosure materials.
Papp, an invention in the field of medical device manufacture, teaches:
wherein the enclosure is made of clear or translucent materials.Norrie teaches in fig. 1 and [0023] an enclosure featuring transparent material through which conveyors pass.
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 Henderson and Overskeid, wherein the enclosure is made of clear or translucent materials, because a transparent enclosure allows a human operator to inspect the enclosure interior to determine the location of any transport assembly or goods within the enclosure.
22. Claims 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Henderson in view of Overskeid and Norrie and further in view of Blaser, Niklaus, US 2022/0137610 (hereinafter Blaser).
23. Regarding claim 15,
Henderson in view of Overskeid and Norrie teaches the limitations of claim 14 and also:
further comprising: an electronic processor system coupled to the transport actuator and configured to: receive a desired location of the transport assembly;Henderson discloses in [0242]-[0244] aspects of its computing and communication network which necessarily comprise an electronic processor system. Henderson discloses software routing articles to a destination in [0100] and discloses a request issued by a nurse in [0232] which triggers the system to deliver the requested medication to the location of the nurse.
determine a current location of the transport assembly;Henderson discloses determining the current location of the transport in [0185] and [0274].
However, Henderson in view of Overskeid and Norrie does not teach all aspects of:
and control the transport actuator to move the transport assembly to the desired location based on the current location of the transport assembly.While Henderson tracks transport assembly locations and also moves its transport assembly to a desired destination, it does not explicitly disclose moving the transport on the basis of the current location.
Blaser, an invention in the field of textile machine management, teaches:
and control the transport actuator to move the transport assembly to the desired location based on the current location of the transport assembly.Blaser teaches in [0029] calculating a route for the movement of a carrier from a current position to a destination based in part on the current position.
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 Henderson, Overskeid, and Norrie to control the transport actuator to move the transport assembly to the desired location based on the current location of the transport assembly, as taught by Blaser, because in order to move an article or vehicle from a source to a destination it is generally necessary to know the source location and to calculate movement based on the source location.
24. Regarding claim 16,
Henderson in view of Overskeid, Norrie, and Blaser teaches the limitations of claim 15 and also:
further comprising: a scanner (876: fig. 56, [0287]) coupled to the enclosure and configured to identify a location of the transport assembly,Henderson discloses the use of a scanner 876 coupled to enclosure 872 to identify a position of its car (transport assembly) in fig. 56 and [0287].
wherein the location of the transport assembly corresponds to identification information of a transport block in front of the scanner,Henderson discloses the disposition of tags at transport block locations for the purpose of identifying locations in [0185] and [0274] and the use of this particular scanner in [0287].
wherein locations of the plurality of transport blocks are determined based on the location of the transport assembly,Henderson discloses its transport assembly in the form of a car may carry a scanner in [0273]. This scanner determines the car’s location based on the scanned tag of the transport block as per [0274]. Alternatively fixed scanners such as 876 in fig. 56 can determine locations in the particular block proximate to the scanner.
and wherein operating the transport assembly to the location of the filled prescription order includes operating the transport assembly such that the filled prescription order is directly above a dispensing opening of the pharmacy order delivery and transport system as determined based on the location of the transport assembly.Henderson discloses this arrangement in fig. 56 wherein the transport vehicle on its horizontal track is above the dispensing opening of vertical channel 878.
25. Regarding claim 17,
Henderson in view of Overskeid, Norrie, and Blaser teaches the limitations of claim 15 and also:
wherein the filled prescription order is a first filled prescription order, and wherein the electronic processor system is further configured to receive a selection of a second filled prescription order;Henderson discloses in [0232] that medicine ”overpacks” may be requested by a health care provider to be transported by its system. Any industrial process can be assumed to be repeatable indefinitely, and so having disclosed a first order selection, a second and any number of other order selections is likewise disclosed.
determine a transport block of the plurality of transport blocks corresponding to the second filled prescription order; and relate the second filled prescription order with the transport block, wherein a location of the second filled prescription order corresponds to identification information of the transport block.Henderson discloses determining overpack and transport assembly transport locations in [0185] and in [0274] that transport locations (“transport blocks”) may be tagged with location identifiers that can be scanned by the transport assembly so the system can determine location. Thus a second filled order (like all other orders conveyed by Henderson’s system) may be related to a transport block where the block’s identifier determines the order location.
26. Regarding claim 18,
Henderson in view of Overskeid, Norrie, and Blaser teaches the limitations of claim 15 and also:
determine a location of the second filled prescription order on the transport assembly,Henderson discloses determining the location of an overpack containing prescription medicine in [0185] and [0274]. This determination can work for a first or a second order.
However, Henderson in view of Overskeid, Norrie, and Blaser does not explicitly teach all aspects of these limitations, and so additional rationales for combining multiple disclosures of Henderson will be presented:
wherein the filled prescription order is a first filled prescription order, further comprising: a dispensing opening provided on the enclosure and in communication with a return container,
and wherein the electronic processor system is further configured to determine that a second filled prescription order of the plurality of filled prescription orders is past a pick-up by date,
operate the transport assembly to align the location of the second filled prescription order with the dispensing opening,
and return, via the dispensing opening, the second filled prescription order to the return container.Regarding these limitations, while Henderson discloses all the requisite individual structures including a transport assembly in fig. 56 along with a method of dispensing medicine from the source to a destination nurse server workstation (fig. 50), and while the nurse server workstation is further disclosed to comprise a return slot 588 for returning medicine, the method of returning medicine between the workstation of fig. 50 and the transport assembly of fig. 56 is not explicitly disclosed. For this reason, rather than showing that the previous combination of Henderson and Overskeid teaches these limitations, we introduce a further combination with Henderson for which further combination rationales are cited.
Henderson in view of Overskeid, Norrie, and Blaser further teaches the limitations:
wherein the filled prescription order is a first filled prescription order, further comprising: a dispensing opening (588: fig. 50) provided on the enclosure and in communication with a return container (896, 870: fig. 56),Henderson discloses a second dispensing opening 588 in fig. 50 associated with the nurse server workstation, which is disclosed in [0283]-[0287] to be in communication with the transport assembly of fig. 56 cited above via its vertical track 878. Henderson does not explicitly disclose that the dispensing opening 588 of fig. 50 is in communication with the transport assembly via the track. However, given that the tray 896 of fig. 56 is configured to descend via track 878 bearing a medicine pack from above, and given that the tray must return from the nurse station below to the position depicted above regardless of whether it is carrying medicine, Henderson in view of Overskeid, Norrie, and Blaser teaches the return of medicine deposited in opening 588 of fig. 50. In this combination, we consider the “return container” to either be the tray 896 or one of the carriers 870 of fig. 56 to which medicine would be returned via track 878 from the nurse server workstation below.
and wherein the electronic processor system is further configured to determine that a second filled prescription order of the plurality of filled prescription orders is past a pick-up by date,Henderson discloses medicine expiration dates in [0104] and the determination of an allowed medicine retention period at above a storage temperature after which medicine must be returned in [0237]. Henderson moreover discloses the return of unneeded or unusable medicines in [0179], [0206] and [0231]. However, despite disclosing these separate elements, Henderson does not explicitly disclose the determination that a particular order is past its expiration or pick-up by date. We hold, however, that it would be obvious to perform this determination because Henderson discloses returning unusable or unneeded medicines and because expired medicines are a type of unusable medicine.
operate the transport assembly to align the location of the second filled prescription order with the dispensing opening,In this extended combination we extend the transport assembly of fig. 56 to include track 878 and tray 896 which is transported along the track. Henderson discloses in [0283]-[0287] that the tray 896 carries medicine down to the nurse server workstation for dispensing. This constitutes alignment of the order with a dispensing opening in the workstation in fig. 50.
and return, via the dispensing opening, the second filled prescription order to the return container.Henderson’s workstation embodiment of fig. 50 (“nurse server”) includes dispensing opening 588 (a return slot, see [0231]), and the workstation is disclosed to be in communication with the enclosure and assembly of fig. 56 in [0283]-[0287] via vertical track 878. Although it is not explicitly disclosed, we consider it obvious to use the return slot 588 of the nurse server workstation of fig. 50 to connect to the transport assembly of fig. 56 via track 878 in fig. 56. Returning medications to the central pharmacy source is disclosed in [0206] and [0231]. In this combination, we consider the “return container” to either be the tray 896 or one of the carriers 870 of fig. 56 to which medicine would be returned via track 878 from the nurse server workstation below.
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 Henderson and Overskeid, (i) wherein the dispensing opening is a first dispensing opening and the filled prescription order is a first filled prescription order, further comprising: a second dispensing opening in communication with a return container; (ii) wherein the electronic processor system is configured to: determine that a second filled prescription order of the plurality of filled prescription orders is past a pick-up by date; (iii) to operate the transport assembly to align the location of the second filled prescription order with the second dispensing opening; and (iv) return, via the second dispensing opening, the second filled prescription order to the return container, as also taught by Henderson. Regarding limitations (i), (iii), and (iv), these would have been obvious because Henderson a) discloses the requisite structures and method for performing the delivery of medicine from the transport assembly to the nurse server workstation, b) discloses that medicines may be returned from the nurse server workstation to the transport assembly (without explicitly specifying the precise mechanism for doing so), and c) the structures explicitly disclosed for transport in the first (dispensing) direction are suitable for use in transport in the second (return) direction. The motivation for returned unneeded or unwanted medication is plainly to avoid wastage of the medication and because even where medication is no longer usable, it may be more efficient to dispose of such medication in bulk at a central location. A person of ordinary skill in the art would therefore find it obvious to use Henderson’s system to return medicine in much the same manner that it was delivered. Regarding limitation (ii), because Henderson discloses medicine expiration dates and the return of unusable medicine to its dispensing source, it would likewise have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to return medicines whose expiration date has passed (i.e. whose pick-up by date has passed) using these structures and method.
27. Regarding claim 19,
Henderson in view of Overskeid and Norrie teaches the limitations of claim 15 and also:
wherein the filled prescription order is a first filled prescription order, further comprising: a dispensing opening (aperture related to 878: fig. 56) provided on the enclosure,The unnumbered dispensing opening of fig. 56 is the aperture through which vertical track 878 is connected to the horizontal track system in enclosure 872. The figure along with [0283]-[0287] shows that medicine containers can be dispensed through the opening via a tray 896 that travels along the vertical track.
and wherein the electronic processor system is further configured to receive a selection of a second filled prescription order from the plurality of filled prescription orders for dispensing,Henderson discloses in [0232] that medicine ”overpacks” may be requested by a health care provider to be transported by its system.
determine a location of the second filled prescription order on the transport assembly, Henderson discloses in [0120] that orders may be located on the transport assembly.
operate, using the transport actuator, the transport assembly to align the location of the second filled prescription order with the dispensing opening, and dispense, via the dispensing opening, the filled prescription order.Henderson discloses this general method in fig. 56 and [0283]-[0287]. As seen in the figure and disclosed in the text, the transport assembly is aligned with the opening of vertical track 878 so a single pack of medicine can be dispensed via a tray 896 along the track of 878.
28. Regarding claim 20,
Henderson in view of Overskeid and Norrie teaches the limitations of claim 19 and also:
wherein the location of the second filled prescription order corresponds to identification information of a transport block of the plurality of transport blocks used to store the second filled prescription order.Henderson discloses the use of tags disposed around the track to identify locations in [0274]. As its track is composed of track sections or transport blocks, these tags identify the transport block as claimed.
Conclusion
29. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 5,346,054 and US 2011/0186405 teach the use of hooks and wheels in conveyor systems.
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