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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 11/30/2023, 02/18/2025, 07/01/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Group II, claims 59-79 in the reply filed on 03/12/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
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 76 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 76 recites “A stack processing apparatus of claim 59 in a stack processing station comprising: a first stack processing apparatus according to claim 59; and a second stack processing apparatus according to claim 59” because “a stack processing apparatus of 59” is recited in the preamble it is unclear what the first and second processing apparatus of claim 59 refer to.
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 (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 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 59-70, 72 and 78 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by UEDA et al. (US 20200165082 A1).
Regarding Claim 59, Ueda et al. teaches a stack processing apparatus for moving a container out of and/or into a vertical stack of containers, the apparatus comprising:
a stack receiving region (region above 22) for receiving a vertical stack of containers ([0034]; see Fig. 9);
a stack separating mechanism (25) including a separating member (31) configured to releasably engage a container in the stack ([0046]), the separating member being vertically moveable within the stack receiving region ([0037]; see Fig. 9-10) and configured to allow the separating member to engage any container in the stack and vertically lift the engaged container to separate the stack into an upper sub- stack and a lower sub-stack to expose a target container at the top of the lower sub-stack ([0046]; see Fig. 12); and
a container handling mechanism (24) including a handling member (46) configured to releasably engage the target container in the stack ([0026]; Fig. 10), the handling member being vertically moveable with respect to the stack receiving region ([0049]; see Fig. 11-12) and horizontally moveable to allow the handling member to engage and horizontally extract the target container out of the stack, and/or functioning in a reverse manner to insert a free container into the stack ([0048]; Fig. 11-12]).
Regarding Claim 60, Ueda et al. teaches the stack processing apparatus of claim 59, wherein at least a portion of the handling member is linearly moveable in a horizontal direction towards and away from the stack receiving region ([0048]; Fig.11-12).
Regarding Claim 61, Ueda et al. teaches the stack processing apparatus of claim 59, wherein the handling member comprises: a retractable arm (47) configured to linearly extend and retract in a horizontal direction towards and away from the stack receiving region ([0048]; Fig. 11-12).
Regarding Claim 62, Ueda et al. teaches the stack processing apparatus of claim 59, wherein at least a portion of the handling member is pivotally mounted for movement in a horizontal direction towards and away from the stack receiving region ([0048]; Fig. 11-12).
Regarding Claim 63, Ueda et al. teaches the stack processing apparatus of claim 59, wherein at least a portion of the separating member and/or at least a portion of the handling member is moveable towards and away from the stack to engage and release a container in the stack respectively ([0044, [0048]; See Fig. 11-12)
Regarding Claim 64, Ueda et al. teaches the stack processing apparatus of claim 59, wherein the stack separating mechanism comprises: a pair of horizontally opposed separating members configured to engage a container therebetween (41; see Fig. 4); and/or the container handling mechanism includes a pair of horizontally opposed handling members configured to engage a container therebetween (46 See Fig. 7).
Regarding Claim 65, Ueda et al. teaches the stack processing apparatus of claim 59, comprising: a container receiving region (area/space where 24 moves vertically in; See Fig. 9) horizontally adjacent to the stack receiving region (Fig. 9), wherein the handling member is vertically movable within the container receiving region and horizontally moveable between the container receiving region and the stack receiving region to extract the target container from the stack into the container receiving region and/or insert a free container from the container receiving region into the stack ([0056]; See Fig. 11).
Regarding Claim 66, Ueda et al. teaches the stack processing apparatus of claim 65, comprising: a container port region (11) horizontally adjacent to the container receiving region (Fig. 2), the container port region including a container port (a shelf of 11) configured to receive a target container from the container receiving region ([0032]) and/or receive a free container to be moved into the container receiving region ([0032]).
Regarding Claim 67, Ueda et al. teaches the stack processing apparatus of claim 66, wherein the container port region comprises: a plurality of container ports (shelves of 11) arranged vertically or arranged in a horizontal plane about the container receiving region (Fig.2).
Regarding Claim 68, Ueda et al teaches the stack processing apparatus of claim 66, wherein the handling member is horizontally movable between the container receiving region and the container port region ([0032]; see Fig. 2) and configured to allow the handling member to move the target container from the container receiving region to one or more of the container ports ([0032]) and/or to move a free container from one or more of the container ports to the container receiving region ([0032]); and optionally:
wherein the container handling mechanism includes a plurality of vertically arranged handling members, each handling member being vertically moveable within the container receiving region independently of the other handling members, and wherein at least one handling member of the plurality of handling members is horizontally moveable between the container receiving region and container port region.
Regarding Claim 69, Ueda et al. teaches the stack processing apparatus of claim 67, wherein at least one of the container ports is an out-feed port (a shelf of 11) configured to receive the target container from the container receiving region ([0032]), and at least one of the container ports is an in-feed port (a shelf of 11) configured to receive a free container to be moved to the container receiving region ([0032]).
Regarding Claim 70, Ueda et al. teaches the stack processing apparatus of claim 69, wherein the out-feed port is connected to the in-feed port by a container path external to the container receiving region([0032]; path front one shelf to another), along which the target container will travel from the out-feed port to the in-feed port ([0032]); and optionally: wherein the out-feed port and the in-feed port are vertically arranged and the container path includes vertical transportation means configured to move a container from a height of the out-feed port to a height of the in-feed port.
Regarding Claim 72, Ueda et al. teaches the stack processing apparatus of claim 66, comprising: a container processing region (3) configured to receive the target container from the container port (transported by 2 see Fig. 1) and configured to allow items to be taken out of or placed into the container ([0031]); and optionally: including a buffer region for temporarily storing one or more containers without blocking the container processing region.
Claim(s) 78 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Behling (US 20170121109 A1).
Regarding Claim 78, Behling teaches a method of processing a vertical stack of containers using a stack processing apparatus which includes a stack receiving section (area containing LE), a stack separating mechanism (60), and a container handling mechanism (80), the method comprising:
vertically lifting a container within the vertical stack to separate the stack into an upper sub-stack and a lower sub-stack ([0217]; Fig 33);
horizontally extracting a target container at a top of the lower sub-stack out of the stack and/or horizontally inserting a free container between the upper sub-stack and the lower sub-stack ([0219]; Fig. 35); and
lowering the upper sub-stack onto the lower sub-stack to reform the stack ([0222]; Fig 36-37).
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) 71 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over UEDA et al. (US 20200165082 A1) in view of UEDA et al. (US 20200231420 A1) hereinafter referred to as IWATA.
Regarding Claim 71, Ueda et al. teaches the stack processing apparatus of claim 66,
Ueda et al. does not teach the container receiving region comprises: a container receiving surface configured to receive the target container from the handling member and deliver the target container to any one of the container ports and/or receive a free container from any one of the container ports for insertion into the stack by the handling member; and optionally: wherein the container receiving surface is vertically moveable within the container receiving region independently of the handling member.
Iwata teaches a container receiving surface configured (36; Fig. 2) to receive a target container from a handling member (24) and receive a free container from any one of the container ports for insertion into the stack (22) by the handling member (24). (see [0079])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Ueda et al. with the container receiving surface configured to receive a target container from a handling member and receive a free container from any one of the container ports for insertion into the stack by the handling member as taught of Iwata for the purpose of providing temporary storage increase the carrying capacity of the apparatus.
Claim(s) 74 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over UEDA et al. (US 20200165082 A1) in view of Heggebo et al. (US 20210016966 A1).
Regarding Claim 74, Ueda et al. teaches the stack processing apparatus of claim 59, comprising: a control system ([0070])
Ueda et al. does not explicitly teach a container recognition system configured to determine a vertical position of one or more containers in a stack although one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the control system of Ueda must be capable of this.
Heggebo et al. teaches a container recognition system ([0124]) configured to determine a vertical position of one or more containers in the stack.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the control system of Ueda et al. with the container recognition system of Heggebo et al. so the control system is configured to vertically move the separating member and/or handling member based on determined vertical positions for the purpose of speeding up the automatic control by autonomously recognizing the vertical position of a container.
Claim(s) 75 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over UEDA et al. (US 20200165082 A1) .
Regarding Claims 75, Ueda et al. teaches the stack processing apparatus of claim 59, Ueda et al does not teach wherein the stack separating mechanism comprises: a plurality of vertically arranged separating members, wherein the vertically arranged separating members are vertically moveable within the stack receiving region independently of each other and configured to allow the vertically arranged separating members to move to and engage a plurality of containers in the stack and vertically lift the engaged containers relative to each other to separate the stack into more than two sub-stacks; and optionally: wherein the stack receiving region is configured to receive a predetermined maximum number of vertically stacked containers and a number of vertically arranged separating members corresponds at least to the predetermined maximum number of vertically stacked containers configured and arranged to allow the vertically arranged separating members to move to and engage every container in the stack and vertically lift every container relative to each other to separate the stack in a plurality of sub-stacks, each sub-stack containing only one container.
One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that a plurality of vertically arranged separating members, wherein the vertically arranged separating members are vertically moveable within the stack receiving region independently of each other and configured to allow the vertically arranged separating members to move to and engage a plurality of containers in the stack and vertically lift the engaged containers relative to each other to separate the stack into more than two sub-stacks is an obvious duplication of parts (MPEP 2144.04).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to duplicate the departing members of Ueda et al. so wherein the vertically arranged separating members are vertically moveable within the stack receiving region independently of each other and configured to allow the vertically arranged separating members to move to and engage a plurality of containers in the stack and vertically lift the engaged containers relative to each other to separate the stack into more than two sub-stacks for the purpose of allowing the separating members to create a stack of multiple target containers at an increased rate thereby increasing throughput of the processing apparatus.
Claim(s) 76 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over UEDA et al. (US 20200165082 A1) in view of ABASCAL ALBIZU et al. (US 20100104412 A1).
Regarding Claim 76, Ueda et al. teaches the stack processing apparatus of claim 59 in a stack processing station comprising: a first stack processing apparatus according to claim 59; and a second stack processing apparatus according to claim 59;
Ueda et al. does not teach wherein the first stack processing apparatus is connected to the second apparatus to allow a target container extracted from a stack in the first stack processing apparatus to travel to the second stack processing apparatus for insertion into a stack in the second stack processing apparatus.
Abascal Albizu et al. teaches a first and second process apparatuses (3; Fig. 8) connected to allow a container from the first apparatus to move to the second (see Fig. 8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatuses of Ueda et al with the connection of Abascal Albizu for the purpose of allowing greater storage by moving containers to multiple apparatuses.
Regarding Claim 77 Ueda et al. in view of Abscal Albizu et al. teaches a stack processing station of claim 76 is a stack processing system, the system comprising: one or more vertical stacks of containers (Ueda et al. stacks of containers on 2); and one or more stack processing apparatuses (Ueda et al. apparatus of 2) or one or more stack processing stations (Ueda et al. 2; see Fig. 1).
Claim(s) 79 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BEHLING (US 20170121109 A1) in view of TORSTEN (US 20110038702 A1).
Regarding Claim 79, Behling teaches the method of claim 78,
Behling does not teach after extracting the target container in step (ii), placing an item into and/or removing an item from the target container; and inserting the target container back into the stack or a different stack.
Torsten teaches placing an item into a container before being stacked ([0113]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Behling with a stem of placing an item into and/or removing an item from the target container as taught by Torsten; before inserting the target container back into the stack or a different stack for the purpose of storing an item in the stack.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 73 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Davolio (IT 201900007749 A1) and .
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADARSH NEUPANE whose telephone number is (571)272-8816. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00am-5:00pm.
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
/A.N./Examiner, Art Unit 3655
Prosecution Insights