DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions
Status of Claims
Claims 1-24 of U.S. Application No. 18/529236 filed on 12/05/2023 have been examined.
Office Action is in response to the Applicant's amendments and remarks filed12/09/2025. Claims 1-3, 5, 9-11, 13, 17-19 and 21 was amended. Claim 25 were added by applicant. Claims 1-25 are presently pending and are presented for examination.
Response to Remarks/Arguments
In regards to rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102 (b): Applicant’s amendments with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to any of the references being used in the current rejection. The previous rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 102 (b) to claims 1-20, have been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1-3, 9-11, 17-19 and 25 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Durham et al. [US 10,029851 B1], hereinafter referred to as Durham.
As to Claim 1, 9 and 17, Durham discloses a system, comprising: a management system comprising at least one processor configured to define one or more non-workspace locations, comprising a set of first queueing spaces associated with a first workspace location, for each of a plurality of workspace locations, wherein ([see at least Fig. 2, Fig. 10, Fig. 12, Fig. 13 and column 4, lines 47-67], “Management module 15 assigns tasks to appropriate components of inventory system 10 and coordinates operation of the various components in completing the tasks. These tasks may relate not only to the movement and processing of inventory items, but also to the management and maintenance of the components of inventory system 10. For example, management module 15 may assign portions of workspace 70 as parking spaces for mobile drive units 20, the scheduled recharge or replacement of mobile drive unit batteries, the storage of empty inventory holders 30, or any other operations associated with the functionality supported by inventory system 10 and its various components. Management module 15 may select components of inventory system 10 to perform these tasks and communicate appropriate commands and/or data to the selected components to facilitate completion of these operations”, “the distribution stations 1080 may be arranged for interacting with multiple transfer racks 1038 and/or multiple shuttle racks 1032. For example, transfer racks 1038 arriving to the processing floor 1052 via the lift 1012 may be routed to respective distribution stations 1080 and received in cells 1009, e.g., which may be cells 1009 that are nearest the lift 1012. Robotic manipulators 1074 in distribution stations 1080 may transfer containers from the transfer racks 1038 to shuttle racks 1032 in other cells 1009”); in response to a request by an autonomous mobile robot (AMR) for access to the first workspace location, the management system is configured to grant access to the requesting AMR if the first workspace location is unoccupied or direct the requesting AMR to a first workspace queueing space associated with the first workspace location if the first workspace location is occupied by another AMR ([see at least Fig. 10, Fig. 12, Fig. 13, column 4, lines 4-25, column 4, lines 47-67, column 10, lines 27-46, and column 24, lines 43-59]).
As to Claim 2, 10 and 18, Durham discloses a system, wherein the management system is further configured to, in response to a signal indicating the first workspace location has been exited by the other AMR, send instructions to the requesting AMR granting access to the first workspace location ([see at least Fig. 10, Fig. 12, Fig. 13, column 4, lines 4-25, column 4, lines 47-67, column 10, lines 27-46, and column 24, lines 43-59]).
As to Claim 3, 11 and 19, Durham discloses a system, wherein the plurality of workspace locations are within a warehouse environment and include drop and pick locations ([see at least Fig. 10, Fig. 12, Fig. 13, column 4, lines 4-25 and column 21, lines 6-37], “FIG. 10, the management module 15 may instruct mobile drive units 20 to move transfer racks 1038 from the consolidation stations 1070 to the distribution stations 1080 on the processing floor 1052 via the vertical lifts 1012. At the distribution stations 1080, a containers 60 from the transfer racks 1038 may be placed onto a shuttle rack 1032 for routing to a manual pick station 1090 or an automatic pick station 1095. In some embodiments, the shuttle racks 1032 may be sent to other distribution stations 1080, e.g., for transfer of totes or other inventory to areas served by the other distribution stations 1080. In some aspects, the shuttle racks 1032 can be of a smaller size than the transfer racks 1038. For example, the transfer racks 1038 are shown with three levels in FIG. 10 whereas the shuttle racks 1032 are shown with one level of tote storage capacity”).
As to Claim 25, Durham discloses a system, wherein the one or more non-workspace locations further comprise a set of utility locations separate from any of the plurality of workspace locations.
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 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) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 4-8, 12-16 and 20-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Durham, in view of Debusca et al. [US 2023/0150139 A1], hereinafter referred to as Debusca.
As to claims 4, 12 and 20, Durham discloses all of the limitations of claim 1 as stated above. Durham does not explicitly disclose wherein the management system is configured to generate computer displays showing status of queuing spaces as being assigned or available. However Debusca teaches wherein the management system is configured to generate computer displays showing status of queuing spaces as being assigned or available ([see at least 0080], “the computing unit (25) sends a command signal to the user interface (110) to display a message indicating that the robot (16) is waiting for a cart (22)). An individual at the location will see that the robot (16) is waiting for a cart (22) and can move a cart (22) into place. The robot (16) can then detect the presence of a receiver hitch (1) and/or an individual can indicate to the robot (16), via input into the user interface (110), that a cart (22) is at the location and the robot (16) can perform the function of identifying the cart (22)“). Both Durham and Debusca illustrate similar methods in manage autonomous mobile robot within a workspace. Durham discloses similar method just silent on the display indicating system. Debusca on the other hand teaches a system wherein the management system is configured to generate computer displays showing status of queuing spaces as being assigned or available.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have modified Durham so as to include computer displays showing status of queuing spaces as being assigned or available, with a reasonable expectation of success. Those having ordinary skill in the art would understand that computer displays showing status of queuing spaces as being assigned or available in Debusca, as required by the claim. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine Durham and Debusca because this would improve visual representation of the status of each mobile robot.
As to Claim 4, 12 and 20, Debusca discloses a system, wherein the management system is configured to generate computer displays showing status of queuing spaces as being assigned or available ([see at least 0080]).
As to Claim 5, 13 and 21, Debusca discloses a system, wherein the management system is configured to generate computer displays enabling creation of a set of queueing spaces in association with the location ([see at least 0080]).
As to Claim 6, 14 and 22, Debusca discloses a system, wherein the management system is configured to generate computer displays enabling creation of a set of utility locations ([see at least 0080]).
As to Claim 7, 15 and 23, Debusca discloses a system, wherein the utility locations include charging stations, service areas, and non-work idling areas ([see at least 0017, 0059, 0079 and 0080]).
As to Claim 8, 16 and 24, Debusca discloses a system, wherein the management system is configured to generate computer displays showing status of utility locations ([see at least 0080]).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YAZAN A SOOFI whose telephone number is (469)295-9189632. The examiner can normally be reached on Flex.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jabr Fadey can be reached on 572-272-1516 The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/YAZAN A SOOFI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668