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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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 spring element recited in claim 21 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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: element number 14 is used to represent both the gear wheel and the electric motor. See paragraph [0042] of the instant published application for example.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 15-18 and 20-28 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Re: claim 15. The phrase “the travel unit” is indefinite. It is unclear which travel unit Applicant intends to refer to since more than one travel unit was previously recited.
Re: claim 20. The phrase “at least one electric motor that drives at least one gear transmission of the travel unit, wherein the at least one gear wheel, the at least one gear transmission, or” is indefinite. It is unclear whether the gear wheel and the gear transmission refer to the same or different elements. Paragraph [0040] of the instant published application explains “gear wheel 14, thus forming a so-called transmission or gear, respectively” which appears to suggest that the gear wheel forms the transmission.
The remaining claims are indefinite due to their dependency from claim 20.
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.
Claim(s) 20-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO-2018/136987 (WO’987) in view of US Patent Application 2015/0219172 to Saoyama et al.
Re: claims 20 and 22. WO’987 shows in figure 3 a travel unit for moving a driverless transporter, the travel unit comprising: at least one wheel carrier 2 on which at least one driven wheel 3 is arranged, wherein the at least one driven wheel 3 is connected via at least one gear wheel, as labeled, to at least one motor 4 that drives at least one gear transmission, as labeled and as best understood, of the travel unit, but is silent with regard to the motor being electric and with regard to the limitation wherein the at least one gear wheel, the at least one gear transmission, or the at least one driven wheel is directly paired with at least one blocking device which is configured such that, in the case of a malfunction or interruption in an energy supply to the transporter, the at least one blocking device is configured to be activated, so that the at least one gear transmission, the at least one
[AltContent: textbox (Gear wheel/transmission)]
[AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
463
508
media_image1.png
Greyscale
gear wheel, or the at least one driven wheel, is blocked or locked-via the at least one blocking device.
Saoyama et al. teach in paragraph [0046] the use a motor in the environment of a movement blocking device or brake being electric.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the motor of WO’987 to have been electric, in view of the teachings of Saoyama et al., in order to provide a power driving source that facilitates active control and performance optimization.
Saoyama et al. teach in figures 4a and 4b the at least one gear wheel 28, the at least one gear transmission 28 as best understood, or the at least one driven wheel is directly paired with at least one blocking device 5 which is configured such that, in the case of a malfunction or interruption in an energy supply to the transporter i.e. when the electric motor has no power as described in paragraph [0046], the at least one blocking device is configured to be activated, so that the at least one gear transmission, the at least one gear wheel, or the at least one driven wheel, is blocked or locked-via the at least one blocking device i.e. the locking mechanism cannot be switch to an unlocking state once it is in the locking state set forth in fig. 4A.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the travel unit of WO’987, as modified, to have been as recited immediately above, in view of the teachings Saoyama et al.., in order to provide a means of maintaining the travel unit in a braked position in the case of power loss for improved safety.
Re: claims 21 and 24. WO’987, as modified, teaches in figures 4A and 4B of Saoyama et al. wherein the at least one blocking device 5 is formed by an electromagnetic brake pin 29 which, without a supply of energy to element 30, is arranged in a defined position shown in figure 4B via a spring element 41.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the travel unit of WO’987, as modified, to have been as recited immediately above, in view of the teachings Saoyama et al.., in order to provide a means of selectively engaging the gear wheel or transmission to selectively lock the wheel in place depending on operating conditions.
Re: claim 23. WO’987, as modified, teaches in figures 1, 2, 4A, and 4B of Saoyama et al. wherein the at least one blocking device 5 is arranged within at least one wheel carrier 1, 10.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the at least one blocking device of WO’987, as modified, to have been arranged within the at least one wheel carrier, in view of the teachings Saoyama et al.., in order to provide a means of protecting the components of the at least one blocking device from damage and premature wear.
Claim(s) 15-18 and 25-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO-2018/136987 (WO’987) in view of US Patent Application 2015/0219172 to Saoyama et al. as applied above, and further in view of AT-509305 (AT’305)(using DE-502010001552 as an English equivalent).
Re: claim 25. WO’987, as modified, is silent with regard to the travel unit being of a driverless transporter with a chassis that is generally U-shaped with the travel unit comprising at least two travel units arranged on each of the two legs of the chassis and with the travel units being connected to a control system for the driving operation.
AT’305 teaches in figures 5 and 6 the use of a driverless transporter with a chassis that is generally U-shaped as shown best in figure 6 with the travel unit comprising at least two travel units shown in the area of 11 arranged on each of the two legs of the chassis and with the travel units being connected to a control system or that which provides the automated guiding based on sensor output as set forth in the last claim, for example, for the driving operation.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the travel unit of WO’987, as modified, to have been arranged on a driverless transporter, in view of the teachings AT’305, in order to provide a means of enabling the translation capability of an automated vehicle to help complete important warehouse tasks, for example.
Re: claims 15-18 and 26-28. WO’987, as modified, teaches in paragraph [0046] of Saoyama et al. wherein the at least one blocking device is deactivated during driving operation.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the travel unit of WO’987, as modified, to have been arranged on a driverless transporter, in view of the teachings of Saoyama et al., in order to provide a means of ensuring that the locking mechanism is switched to the unlocking state to not be kept in a braked position and to allow the transporter to carry on its required functions. Examiner notes that the combination results in each travel unit including its separate blocking device.
Election/Restrictions
No claims have been withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 10/14/25. Examiner notes that the claims have been amended by Applicant to depend from claim 20 which was a part of the elected group.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. JP-2017149579 and JP-2007216886 teach the use of similar unmanned transporter devices and US Patent Application 2015/0041261 teaches the use of a locking mechanism selectively cooperating with a gear wheel in a movement stopping environment.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MELODY M BURCH whose telephone number is (571)272-7114. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 6:30AM-3PM, generally.
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, Robert Siconolfi can be reached at 571-272-7124. 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.
mmb
February 7, 2026
/MELODY M BURCH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616