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 .
Status of Claims
Applicant’s submission filed 3/11/24 has been entered. Claims 1 - 8 are presented for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 7/10/24, 3/28/25, 6/16/25 have been considered by the examiner.
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.
Note: The following analysis is based on the Revised Guidance titled “2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance (Vol. 84, No. 4).
STEP 1
Are the claims directed to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter?
Claims 1-8 are all directed to a statutory category (e.g., a process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter). The answer is YES.
STEP 2A. Prong 1
The claims disclose the abstract idea of tracking and transporting items within a commercial space.
Exemplary claim 1 recites the following abstract concepts that are found to include “abstract idea”:
“tracking a total number of items of a first type in a first display location in a retail area;
--transmitting a notification when the total number of items of the first type in the first display location in the retail area is reduced to a predetermined threshold number for the items of the first type;
-- loading a number of the items of the first type onto an autonomous vehicle in a storage area;
--directing the autonomous vehicle to deliver the number of items of the first type from the storage area to a first predetermined delivery location in the retail area;
--moving the number of items of the first type from the first predetermined delivery location to the first display location; and updating the total number of items of the first type in the first display location. .”
The remaining limitations are no more than computer elements (i.e., autonomous vehicle) to be used as a tool to perform this abstract idea.
The recited limitations cover a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers subject matter viewed as a certain method of organizing human activity with the additional recitation of generic computer components. For example, but for the “autonomous vehicle” language, the steps in the context of this claim encompasses the user manually tracking the number of items, transmitting the notification, loading. the items onto the vehicle, directing the vehicle to deliver the items in a storage area, moving the items to a display location and updating/recording the number of items on the display location.
The practice of tracking transmitting and updating data, is a commercial or legal interaction long prevalent in our system of commerce. The claims recite the idea of performing various conceptual steps generically resulting in the tracking and transporting items within a commercial space.
. As determined earlier, none of these steps recites specific technological implementation details, but instead get to this result by receiving, selecting and determining data. Thus, the claims are directed to a certain method of organizing human activity
STEP 2A, Prong 2
Are there additional elements or a combination of elements in the claim that apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that it is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception?
The claim recites no additional element. Accordingly, the abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application and no meaningful limits are imposed on practicing the abstract idea.
The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
STEP 2B
The next issue is whether the claims provide an inventive concept because the additional elements recited in the claims provide significantly more than the recited judicial exception. Taking the claim elements separately, the function performed by the autonomous vehicle is purely conventional. The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, no additional element is disclosed. The claim is not patent eligible.
Considered as an ordered combination, the computer components of Applicants' claims add nothing that is not already present when the steps are considered separately. The claimed invention does not focus on an improvement in computers as tools, but rather certain independently abstract ideas that use computers as tools. {Elec. Power, 830 F.3d at 1354). (Step 2B: NO).
There is no indication that indication that the transmission of data is done with anything other than a generic computer, the Symantec, TLI, and OIP Techs. Court decisions cited in MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) indicate that mere collection or receipt of data over a network is a well‐understood, routine, conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner (as it is here).
Dependent claims 3-8, 11-23 do not include any new additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. For the reasons described above, they are also ineligible.
Accordingly, a conclusion that the collecting step is well-understood, routine, conventional activity is supported under Berkheimer Option 2.
See MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) The courts have recognized the following computer functions as well-understood, routine, and conventional functions when they are claimed in a merely generic manner (e.g., at a high level of generality) or as insignificant extra-solution activity.
i. Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1745 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (using a telephone for image transmission); OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350,1355,112 USPQ2d 1093,1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network); but see DDR Holdings, LLC v. Hoteis.com, L.P., 773 F.3d 1245, 1258, 113 USPQ2d 1097, 1106 (Fed. Cir. 2014) ("Unlike the claims in Ultramercial, the claims at issue here specify how interactions with the Internet are manipulated to yield a desired result-a result that overrides the routine and conventional sequence of events ordinarily triggered by the click of a hyperlink." (emphasis added));
iv. Storing and retrieving information in memory, Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306,1334,115 USPQ2d 1681,1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015); OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1363,115 USPQ2d at 1092-93.
The claims are ineligible.
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.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over High et al. (US 20160260054 A1), in further view of High et al. (US10315897).
Re-claim 1, High et al. ‘054 teach ---A method of tracking and transporting items within a commercial space, the method comprising:
--tracking a total number of items of a first type in a first display location in a retail area;
(see e.g. [0099] By monitoring products on the shelves, the central computer system can enhance product visibility, improve customer shopping experiences, improve on shopping facility employee efficiency and effectiveness, increase sales, and other such benefits. The 3D scans can then be evaluated to identify when product placement is less than optimal and when a shelf has insufficient quantities of a product.
[0134] Again, in some instances, the reference offset may be specific to a particular product, a particular shelf, and/or a particular product and its placement on a particular shelf.)
--transmitting a notification when the total number of items of the first type in the first display location in the retail area is reduced to a predetermined threshold number for the items of the first type;
(see e.g. [0135] A notification can be issued (e.g., displayed, communicated to a user interface unit 114, etc.) in response to identifying that the facing area threshold 1304 across the shelf of the select area has the product depth distance that is greater than the predefined depth distance threshold 1206. Again, the notification can request action be taken, such as facing the product, restocking the shelf, confirming an order for the product has been submitted, and/or other such actions.
[0091] The one or more actions can include, for example, restocking products onto a shelf
[0136] Some embodiments further issue a notification when there are not enough items of a product behind items of the product on a shelf.
[0123] When thresholds are exceeded, associates are notified via text, email, voice mail, or some other electronic notification that the modular needs attention. Associates can acknowledge the alert, correct the situation, and follow up to the central computer system with their completion of task status. The central computer system may record or otherwise log actions of the motorized transport units, 3D scanners 602, and associates and/or colleagues
[0126] the central computer system may further evaluate an area of the shelf corresponding to the product of interest that are empty of items of the product relative to one or more threshold areas in determining when to notify shopping facility that action should be taken.
[0129] The evaluation can further identify, for example, that a threshold number of rows within the select area do not have at least the threshold number of items. In response to detecting a lack of a desired quantity of items at the area of the shelf being evaluated, a restocking notification can be issued to a shopping facility associate.)
Although High et al. ‘054 – anticipate--directing the autonomous vehicle to deliver to a first predetermined delivery location in the retail area;
(see e.g. [0140] One or more movement commands can be identified that are configured to control movement of the motorized transport unit to cause the motorized transport unit to move to the destination location in accordance with the route.
High et al. ‘054 – do not explicitly teach the following limitations.
However, High et al. –‘897 teach --loading a number of the items of the first type onto an autonomous vehicle in a storage area;
(see e.g. High et al. ‘897) Stocker Assistance: This feature allows the central computer system to track movement of merchandise flow into and around the back-room areas. For example, using visual recognition and captured images, the central computer system 106 can determine if carts are loaded or not for moving merchandise between the back room areas and the sale floor areas.
--directing the autonomous vehicle to deliver the number of items of the first type from the storage area to a first predetermined delivery location in the retail area;
(see e.g. High et al. ‘897) --In other instances, the central computer system may communicate instructions to one or more motorized transport units to cause the one or more motorized transport units to retrieve the detected item and transport the item to one of multiple different predefined locations.
In some embodiments, a system for sorting items discarded in a shopping facility comprises: a motorized transport unit configured to travel around discarded items collected from the shopping facility and placed in a sorting area in the shopping facility,
In step 1930, the system determines a sorting category for the item. In some embodiments, the item characterization database may assign a sorting category to a plurality of identifiable items and item types. -- In some embodiments, each categorize may be generally associated with a method of deposition (e.g. send to X recycling service, send to landfill, convert to fuel, convert to compost, inspected for restocking, etc.).
--moving the number of items of the first type from the first predetermined delivery location to the first display location; and
(see e.g. High et al. ‘897 -- the system may generate a restock task instruction to an MTU and/or a store associate. For example, the task may include bringing items out form the back room to place on the shelves and/or to order more items from the supplier.)
-- updating the total number of items of the first type in the first display location.
(see e.g. High et al. ‘897)---Often, the central computer system includes a shopping facility mapping, images of multiple portions of the shopping facility, two-dimensional (2D) and/or three-dimensional (3D) scans of some or all of the shopping facility and/or products, and other such information. This mapping and/or scan data can be updated as items are moved and/or products are placed in feature locations (e.g., end caps are added, adjusted, removed, etc.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify High et al. ‘054, and include the steps cited above, as taught by High et al. –‘897, in order to modify Hight et al. ‘054 and include the steps cited above as taught by High et al. ‘897), in order to provide assistance to customers and/or workers in a shopping facility (see e.g. High et al. ‘897).
Re-claim 2, Hight et al. ‘054 do not teach the limitations as claimed.
However, High et al. ‘897 teach --The method of claim 1, further comprising directing the autonomous vehicle to a predetermined loading location in the storage area prior to loading the number of the items of the first type onto the autonomous vehicle.
(see e.g. High et al. ‘897) --In other instances, the central computer system may communicate instructions to one or more motorized transport units to cause the one or more motorized transport units to retrieve the detected item and transport the item to one of multiple different predefined locations.
In some embodiments, a system for sorting items discarded in a shopping facility comprises: a motorized transport unit configured to travel around discarded items collected from the shopping facility and placed in a sorting area in the shopping facility,
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify High et al. ‘054, and include the steps cited above, as taught by High et al. –‘897, in order to modify Hight et al. ‘054 and include the steps cited above as taught by High et al. ‘897), in order to provide assistance to customers and/or workers in a shopping facility (see e.g. High et al. ‘897).
Re-claim 3, Hight et al. ‘054 teach --The method of claim 1, further comprising coupling a cart to the autonomous vehicle.
(see e.g. [007] FIGS. 3A and 3B are illustrations of the motorized transport unit of FIGS. 2A and 2B detachably coupling to a movable item container, such as a shopping cart, in accordance with some embodiments;
[0023] Generally, the system makes use of automated, robotic mobile devices, e.g., motorized transport units, that are capable of self-powered movement through a space of the shopping facility and providing any number of functions. Movement and operation of such devices may be controlled by a central computer system or may be autonomously controlled by the motorized transport units themselves.
[0028])
Re-claims 4, 6, Hight et al. ‘054 do not teach
However, High et al. ‘897 teach ---The method of claim 3, wherein the loading the number of the items of the first type onto the autonomous vehicle comprises loading the number of the items of the first type onto the cart. 6. The method of claim 5, wherein the loading the number of the items of the first type onto the autonomous vehicle comprises placing the number of the items of the first type into the at least one container.
(see e.g. --The track system can allow and/or transport motorized transport units, and/or special motorized transport units, and in some instances, equipment utilized by the motorized transport units (e.g., cleaning systems, ground treatment systems, cart retrieval motorized transport units, motorized transport units with enhanced power capabilities, etc.).
These motorized transport units 102 are located in the shopping facility 101 and are configured to move throughout the shopping facility space. Further details regarding such motorized transport units 102 appear further below. Generally speaking, these motorized transport units 102 are configured to either comprise, or to selectively couple to, a corresponding movable item container 104. A simple example of an item container 104 would be a shopping cart as one typically finds at many retail facilities, or a rocket cart, a flatbed cart or any other mobile basket or platform that may be used to gather items for potential purchase.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify High et al. ‘054, and include the steps cited above, as taught by High et al. –‘897, in order to modify Hight et al. ‘054 and include the steps cited above as taught by High et al. ‘897), in order to facilitate sorting of items (see e.g. High et al. ‘897).
Re-claim 5, Hight et al. ‘054 teach --The method of claim 1, wherein the autonomous vehicle further comprises at least one container associated with the autonomous vehicle.
High et al. (see e.g. [007] FIGS. 3A and 3B are illustrations of the motorized transport unit of FIGS. 2A and 2B detachably coupling to a movable item container, such as a shopping cart, in accordance with some embodiments;
[0023] Generally, the system makes use of automated, robotic mobile devices, e.g., motorized transport units, that are capable of self-powered movement through a space of the shopping facility and providing any number of functions. Movement and operation of such devices may be controlled by a central computer system or may be autonomously controlled by the motorized transport units themselves.)
Re-claim 7, --The method of claim 1, further comprising: tracking a total number of items of a second type in a second display location in the retail area; and transmitting a notification when the total number of items of the second type in the second display location in the retail area is reduced to a predetermined threshold number for the items of the second type,
wherein the loading the number of items of the first type further comprises loading a number of the items of the second type onto the autonomous vehicle in the storage area, and wherein the moving the items of the first type further comprises moving the number of items of the second type from the first predetermined delivery location to the second display location.
***High et al. . ‘054 teach different types of products and multiple shelves .
(see e.g. [0094] In some embodiments, the shopping facility assistance system 600 further includes and/or implements a shopping facility product monitoring system configured to monitor product placement on shelves, racks, cases, bins and other such product support structures distributed throughout the shopping facility, in accordance with some embodiments. The product monitoring system is configured to obtain data corresponding to product placement on the shelves, and based on the product placement determine whether one or more actions should be taken relative to the product placement, including a lack of items of a product available for customers on a shelf.
[0079] For example, the system can assist workers to know what products and items are on the shelves and which ones need attention. [0132] Similarly, the central computer system can be configured, in some embodiments, to identify, relative to each of multiple rows of items of a product supported by a shelf and/or empty rows, whether a threshold number of items of the product are present within each row. For some products, a notification may be issued in response to identifying that one or more rows do not have the desired number of items. With other products, the central computer system may further identify that a threshold number of the rows of items of the product within the select area do not have at least a threshold number of items, and issue a notification requesting action be taken in response to identifying that at least the threshold number of rows do not have at least the threshold number of items.
***High et al. ‘897 teach a system for sorting items and ---cause the motorized transport unit to move the item, with the item mover device, from the sorting area into a category area associated with the sorting category.
High et al. . ‘054 , in view of . High et al. ‘897’ teach the limitations as a applied to a second type of products on a second display. (see the teachings from claim 1).
Furthermore, according to KSR (Rationale C), one of ordinary skill in the art would have been capable of applying this known method of enhancement to a second type in a second display location (method, or product) in the prior art and the results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claim 8 recites similar limitations as claims 1 and 7 and is therefore rejected under the same arts and rationale.
Furthermore, ‘High et al. –‘897 teach directing the autonomous vehicle to the number of items of the second type from the storage area to a second predetermined delivery location in the retail area. (see e.g. In some embodiments, each categorize may be generally associated with a method of deposition (e.g. send to X recycling service, send to landfill, convert to fuel, convert to compost, inspected for restocking, etc.).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Hansl et al. (US 20170121111 A1) – Storage System.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LUNA CHAMPAGNE whose telephone number is (571)272-7177. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00.
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.
/LUNA CHAMPAGNE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627
September 5, 2025