DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16th, 2013 is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Election/Restriction Requirement
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I comprising claims 1-8, drawn to a produce packing cart, in the reply filed on 02/24/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 9-17 are therefore withdrawn from consideration.
Information Disclosure Sheet
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/28/20025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the rails (claim 3) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 7 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 7 recites, “further comprising elevator actuator…” However, the claim should instead recite, “further comprising an elevator actuator…”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC §112(b)
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.
Claims 1-8 are 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, the claim is indefinite because the relative limitation “into an adjacent shelf” leaves the scope of the claim unclear. The term “adjacent” is a relative term that must be anchored to a specific reference point to be clearly understood. It is unclear whether the shelf is adjacent to the elevator, adjacent to the container being moved, or adjacent to another shelf within the “plurality of shelves.” Without a clear reference point in the claim language, the exact structural relationship and movement path cannot be determined.
Regarding claim 3, the claim is indefinite due to a lack of proper antecedent basis for the limitation “corresponding rails.” The term “corresponding rails” implies that rails were previously recited in the claims, but neither base claim 1 nor intervening claim 2 positively recites any rails. Consequently, it is unclear what the structure the plurality of wheels are configured to engage with.
Regarding claim 8, the claim is indefinite due to a lack of proper antecedent basis for “the produce.” The claim recites “wherein the produce includes tomatoes.” However, “the produce” is not positively recited in the body of base claim 1. The phrase “A produce packing cart” in the preamble of claim 1 is generally interpreted as a statement of intended use and does not provide proper antecedent basis for “the produce” as a structural component or positively claimed element in a dependent claim.
Regarding claims 2 and 4-7, these claims are also rejected under 35 USC 112(b), due to the dependence upon the above-rejected claims.
Allowable Subject Matter
If the above rejections under 35 USC 112(b) are overcome, claims 1-8 would be deemed as allowable for the following reasons:
Yamashita (US 2014/0212257 A1) teaches a produce packing cart (Packing apparatus shown in figures 1 and 8) comprising: a plurality of shelves (Shown in figures 1 and 8, #14) disposed at different vertical positions (Shown in figures 1 and 14), wherein each shelf of the plurality of shelves is configured to support one or more containers (Figures 1 and 8, #P) disposed therein (Figures 1 and 14 show that the packages are disposed on the shelves), and wherein each shelf includes a first opening on a first side of the plurality of shelves (Figures 1 and 8 show a first opening on a first side of the shelves #18R) and a second opening on a second side of the plurality of shelves opposite from the first side (Figures 1 and 8 show a second opening on a second side of the shelves #18L which is positioned on an opposite side from the first side); a first elevator (Figures 1 and 8, #26L) associated with the first side of the plurality of shelves (Shown in figures 1 and 8); a second elevator (Figures 1 and 8, #26R) associated with the second side of the plurality of shelves (Shown in figures 1 and 8). However, Yamashita does not specifically teach one or more actuators configured to move a container disposed on one of the first and second elevators into an adjacent shelf of the plurality of shelves, and wherein moving the container into the adjacent shelf moves one of the one or more containers disposed in the adjacent shelf onto the other of the first and second elevators.
Aljallis (US 2020/0215955 A1) teaches a vehicle for container transport (shown in figure 1) including a base assembly, a rack assembly, and a processing system (described in abstract). However, Aljallis does not cure the deficiencies of Yamashita identified above.
Peterson (US 8,033,084) teaches an automated bin filling system (shown in figure 1) including a horizontal linear actuator (68) to slide a tray (62) towards a ramp to unload items into a bin (shown in figures 3-4). However, Peterson does not cure the deficiencies of Yamashita identified above.
McDowall (US 11,209,118), Cassady (US 592,982), and Peters (US 2018/0057283 A1) teach relevant aspects of an elevator system similar to that disclosed in the instant application. However, none of the above prior arts cure the deficiencies of Yamashita identified above.
Guido (US 2005/0095330 A1) and Jones (US 2010/0038181 A1) both teach relevant aspects of the dependent claims, but do not cure the deficiencies of Yamashita identified above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACOB A SMITH whose telephone number is (571) 272-3974 and email address is Jacob.Smith@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 7:30AM - 5:30PM.
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, Anna Kinsaul can be reached at (571) 270-1926. 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.
/JACOB A SMITH/Examiner, Art Unit 3731