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 .
Claim Interpretation
The following ordinary and plain meaning is applied to the claim term statisticizing: To make statistical; to apply statistical methods to; to cause to rely on statistics.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim(s) 1-12, 14, 16-20 is/are directed to methods, apparatus, and statutory computer-readable mediums under Step 1 of the eligibility analysis. However, the claims are further directed toward a judicial exception under Step 2A Prong One of the eligibility analysis, namely an abstract idea. Under Step 2A Prong Two of the eligibility analysis, the claim(s) does/do not include additional elements to integrate the exception into a practical application of that exception. Under Step 2B of the eligibility analysis, the claims are not sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because nothing in the asserted claims purports to improve the functioning of the computer itself or effect an improvement in any other technology or technical field. The claim(s) is/are directed to the abstract idea of receiving a counting task, statisticizing identifiers to obtain a statistical result; and comparing the statistical result with a storage result and determining a counting result according to a result of the comparing. This is “organizing information and manipulating information through mathematical correlations, Digitech Image Techs., LLC v. Electronics for Imaging, Inc., 758 F.3d 1344, 1350, 111 USPQ2d 1717, 1721 (Fed. Cir. 2014). The patentee in Digitech claimed methods of generating first and second data by taking existing information, manipulating the data using mathematical functions, and organizing this information into a new form. The court explained that such claims were directed to an abstract idea because they described a process of organizing information through mathematical correlations, like Flook's method of calculating using a mathematical formula. 758 F.3d at 1350, 111 USPQ2d at 1721”, (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(I)(A)(iv)).
The additional element(s) or combination of elements in the claim(s) other than the abstract idea per se, i.e. target automated guided vehicle (AGV), a goods grid, material container, warehouse, etc., amount(s) to no more than implementing the abstract idea on a generic computer system, (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2). Viewed as a whole, these additional claim element(s) do not provide meaningful limitation(s) to transform the abstract idea into a practical application of the abstract idea, and the claim(s) fail to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
A claim that requires a computer may still recite a mental process. For example, using a computer as a tool to perform a mental process. “An example of a case in which a computer was used as a tool to perform a mental process is Mortgage Grader, 811 F.3d. at 1324, 117 USPQ2d at 1699. The patentee in Mortgage Grader claimed a computer-implemented system for enabling borrowers to anonymously shop for loan packages offered by a plurality of lenders, comprising a database that stores loan package data from the lenders, and a computer system providing an interface and a grading module. The interface prompts a borrower to enter personal information, which the grading module uses to calculate the borrower’s credit grading, and allows the borrower to identify and compare loan packages in the database using the credit grading. 811 F.3d. at 1318, 117 USPQ2d at 1695. The Federal Circuit determined that these claims were directed to the concept of "anonymous loan shopping", which was a concept that could be "performed by humans without a computer." 811 F.3d. at 1324, 117 USPQ2d at 1699. Another example is Berkheimer v. HP, Inc., 881 F.3d 1360, 125 USPQ2d 1649 (Fed. Cir. 2018), in which the patentee claimed methods for parsing and evaluating data using a computer processing system. The Federal Circuit determined that these claims were directed to mental processes of parsing and comparing data, because the steps were recited at a high level of generality and merely used computers as a tool to perform the processes. 881 F.3d at 1366, 125 USPQ2d at 1652-53”, (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(emphasis added).
Similar to the cases above, the claims here deal with mathematical comparisons of data. Therefore, the claim(s) 1-12, 14, 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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(s) 1-4, 12, 14, 18 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Liu, CN-111620032-A.
1. (Original) A method for counting supplies, comprising:
determining, in response to receiving a counting task for supplies in a warehouse, a goods grid where a material container corresponding to the counting task is, (see Liu, step S504);
sending the goods grid where the material container is to a target automated guided vehicle (AGV), for the target AGV to perform path planning and acquire identifiers of materials in the material container, (see Liu, step S508);
statisticizing, in response to receiving the identifiers of the materials in the material container that are sent by the target AGV, the identifiers to obtain a statistical result, (see Liu, steps S520 and S522); and
comparing the statistical result with a storage result of the materials in the material container and determining a supplies counting result according to a result of the comparing. (see Liu, "In practical application, based on the cargo information to the inventory of goods to be inventory in the container specifically is as follows: comparing the read goods information with the standard goods information corresponding to the inventory container to be inventory container, so as to determine the goods state in the inventory container to be inventory according to the comparison result, so as to realize the subsequent replenishment or adjustment of goods according to the checking result.").
4. (Original) The method according to claim 1, wherein the materials are provided with electronic tags, and the AGV is provided with a card reading device; and the statisticizing, in response to receiving the identifiers of the materials in the material container that are sent by the target AGV, the identifiers to obtain the statistical result, comprises: determining, in response to receiving an electronic tag set read through the card reading device by the target AGV, the identifiers corresponding to electronic tags in the electronic tag set, and statisticizing the identifiers, (see Liu, “RFID: (Radio Frequency Identification), which is one of automatic identification technology, performing non-contact bidirectional data communication through wireless radio frequency mode, reading and writing the recording medium (electronic tag or radio frequency card) by wireless radio frequency mode, so as to reach the purpose of identifying target and data exchange.”).
5. (Original) The method according to claim 1, wherein the comparing the statistical result with the storage result of the materials in the material container and determining the supplies counting result according to the result of the comparing, comprises: in response to determining that the statistical result is consistent with the storage result, outputting a message for indicating that the storage result is correct, (see Liu, step S522).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 2, 3, 6, 7, 10, 16, 17, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Deng, CN-109264275-A.
2. (Original) The method according to claim 1, further comprising: determining that the counting task is received in response to determining that a preset task generation condition is satisfied, (see Deng, “according to preset rule, the robot receives the inventory task. the robot moves to the storage area from the waiting area of the warehouse”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to combine the features of Liu and Deng because of the following findings of fact:
F. Known Work in One Field of Endeavor May Prompt Variations of It for Use in Either the Same Field or a Different One Based on Design Incentives or Other Market Forces if the Variations Are Predictable to One of Ordinary Skill in the Art
(1) the scope and content of the prior art in the same field of endeavor as that of the applicant’s invention include a similar or analogous device (method, or product), i.e. robotic warehouse optimization;
(2) there were design incentives or market forces which would have prompted adaptation of the known device (method, or product), (see Deng, “provide based on the intelligent warehouse management method of robot, device and computer readable storage medium, aiming at improving the efficiency and degree of automation of warehouse management”);
(3) the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art were encompassed in known variations or in a principle known in the prior art;
(4) one of ordinary skill in the art, in view of the identified design incentives or other market forces, could have implemented the claimed variation of the prior art, and the claimed variation would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
This rationale is applied to all claims below by reference.
3. (Currently Amended) The method according to claim 1 or 2, wherein the determining, in response to receiving the counting task for the supplies in the warehouse, the goods grid where the material container corresponding to the counting task is, comprises: in response to receiving the counting task for the supplies, determining whether a preset supplies counting condition is satisfied; and in response to determining that the preset supplies counting condition is satisfied, determining the goods grid where the material container corresponding to the counting task is, (see Deng, “according to preset rule, the robot receives the inventory task. the robot moves to the storage area from the waiting area of the warehouse”).
6. (Original) The method according to claim 1, wherein the comparing the statistical result with the storage result of the materials in the material container and determining the supplies counting result according to the result of the comparing, comprises: marking the material container in response to determining that the statistical result is inconsistent with the storage result, and sending a marking result to the target AGV for the target AGV to move the material container to a temporary storage location; and generating a recounting task according to difference information between the statistical result and the storage result, (see Deng, “judging whether the inventory is over, if the inventory is not over, after punching out the label through marking mechanism. the label adhered on the goods label information the robot, the robot moving goods to the corresponding storage region is placed on the shelves corresponding to goods of warehousing, robot updating inventory information and report system, make the system warehouse management and updating goods inventory information.”).
7. (Original) The method according to claim 6, wherein the generating the recounting task according to the difference information between the statistical result and the storage result, comprises: determining a segregated storage location for storing the material container; and generating the recounting task according to the difference information and the segregated storage location, (see Deng, “In the present embodiment, the warehouse is divided into the waiting area 302 for differing work of the robot stops, memory 302 for storing goods, inventory area 303 for checking the goods. in the other embodiment, the warehouse further comprises a reservoir 304 for storing goods when using, and buffer 305 for abnormal situation for material handling, for example, when the cargo warehouse, storage area of the corresponding goods 302 has been completely occupied, the cargo is moved buffer 305, waiting for later processing.”).
10. (Original) The method according to claim 7, further comprising: sending a position of the segregated storage location to the target AGV, for the target AGV to transport the material container from the temporary storage location to the segregated storage location when a preset carrying condition is satisfied, (see Deng, “according to preset rule, the robot receives the inventory task. the robot moves to the storage area from the waiting area of the warehouse”).
Claim(s) 8, 9, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Deng, CN-109264275-A, and further in view of Eckman et al., U.S. 20230373722 A1.
8. (Original) The method according to claim 7, wherein the warehouse comprises lane ways formed between a plurality of racks and a roller conveyor line for conveying materials; and the determining the segregated storage location for storing the material container comprises: determining the segregated storage location according to distances between storage locations in each lane way and the roller conveyor line, (see Eckman, ¶ 8-9).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to combine the features of Liu and Deng with Eckman because of the following findings of fact:
F. Known Work in One Field of Endeavor May Prompt Variations of It for Use in Either the Same Field or a Different One Based on Design Incentives or Other Market Forces if the Variations Are Predictable to One of Ordinary Skill in the Art
(1) the scope and content of the prior art in the same field of endeavor as that of the applicant’s invention include a similar or analogous device (method, or product), i.e. robotic warehouse optimization;
(2) there were design incentives or market forces which would have prompted adaptation of the known device (method, or product), (see Deng, “provide based on the intelligent warehouse management method of robot, device and computer readable storage medium, aiming at improving the efficiency and degree of automation of warehouse management”);
(3) the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art were encompassed in known variations or in a principle known in the prior art;
(4) one of ordinary skill in the art, in view of the identified design incentives or other market forces, could have implemented the claimed variation of the prior art, and the claimed variation would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
This rationale is applied to all claims below by reference.
9. (Original) The method according to claim 8, wherein the determining the segregated storage location for storing the material container comprises: determining, for each lane way, a preset number of segregated storage locations according to the distances between the storage locations in the lane way and the roller conveyor line, (see Eckman, ¶ 8-9).
11. (Currently Amended) The method according to any one of claims 6-10 claim 6,further comprising: sending, in response to a preset recounting condition being satisfied, a carrying instruction to the target AGV, for the target AGV to carry the material container stored on the segregated storage location to the roller conveyor line for transportation to a counting workstation to perform recounting, (see Eckman, ¶ 8-9).
As per claims 12, 14 and 16-20, these claims contain the same or similar features as claims 1-11 rejected above, and therefore the above rejections are applied against the remaining claims herein by reference.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. CN 103984346 A, CN-110303500-A, US-20180293543-A1, and US-20200034780-A1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RUSSELL S GLASS whose telephone number is (571)272-7285. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9-5.
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, FLORIAN ZEENDER can be reached at 571-272-6790. 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.
/RUSSELL S GLASS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627