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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 07-21-2026 has been entered.
Claims 1, 3-18, 20, 21, and 31-39 are pending.
For compliance with 37 CFR 1.121, the applicant is advised to not include the text of canceled claims in the claim listing. Claim 19 has been canceled.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 5 and 10 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species as indicated by the applicant, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 09-25-2025.
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)(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.
Claims 1, 3, 6-9, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cantrell et al. (US#2019/0343317).
Regarding claim 1, Cantrell discloses a package locker 100 for receiving a medication package 190 ([0015], last sentence) from a flying vehicle 180, comprising: a locker bay 120 including a first locker compartment 124 and a second locker compartment 126, the first locker compartment overlying the second locker compartment, the first and second locker compartments each having an interior sized and shaped to hold a package, the first locker compartment including a floor 155, the floor being arrangeable in a first position (Fig. 2) where the floor is arranged to support the package in the interior of the first locker compartment and in a second position (Fig. 3) where the floor is arranged to permit the package to fall, under the influence of gravity, from the interior of the first locker compartment into the interior of the second locker compartment, the first locker compartment including a first access door 156 providing controlled access to a package stored within the first locker compartment, the second locker compartment including a second access door 166 providing controlled access to a package stored within the second locker compartment; an actively powered prime mover 150 ([0056], “To that end, the exemplary method 500 of FIG. 5 includes providing a control unit 150 including a processor 410 and coupled to the release panel 155 (step 570) and causing, via the control unit 150, the release panel 155 to move from the closed position to the open position after a predefined interval of time of the package 190 being retained in the first storage compartment 124 without being retrieved by the customer 110 (step 580).”) operatively connected to the floor and configured to move the floor under power between the first and second positions.
Regarding claim 1, the first and second access doors 156 and 166, respectively, are being viewed and labeled as “consumer access doors” as they are capable of being used by a “consumer”. Claim 1 is not a method claim and the specific person which uses the doors represents the intended use of the invention. A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Regarding claim 3, wherein the floor comprises a trap door arranged to pivot into the interior of the second locker compartment when the prime mover moves the floor toward the second position (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 6, further comprising a releasable latch 150 ([0056], control unit 150 for securing and releasing the floor) arranged to secure the floor in the first position.
Regarding claim 7, further comprising a package sensor 153 ([0043]) arranged to detect the presence of a package in the interior of the first package compartment.
Regarding claim 8, wherein the first locker compartment includes a package entry door 128 at a top 130 of the interior of the first locker compartment, the package entry door being arrangeable in a closed position (Fig. 1) where package entry door inhibits access to the interior of the first locker compartment and in an open position (Fig. 2) where the package entry door is arranged to permit the package to fall, under the influence of gravity, into the interior of the first locker compartment.
Regarding claim 9, wherein the package locker includes a prime mover operatively connected to the package entry door and configured to move the package entry door between the open and closed positions ([0044], control unit 150 moves the door 128).
Regarding claim 11, per [0015], there can three, four, or more compartments, such that wherein the floor is a first floor, and wherein the locker bay includes a third locker compartment underlying the second locker compartment, the third locker compartment having an interior sized and shaped to hold the package, the second locker compartment including a second floor, the second floor being arrangeable in a first position where the second floor is arranged to support the package in the interior of the second locker compartment and in a second position where the second floor is arranged to permit the package to fall, under the influence of gravity, from the interior of the second locker compartment into the interior of the third locker compartment.
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 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cantrell et al. (US#2019/0343317) in view of Dudley (US#7854374).
Regarding claim 4, Cantrell discloses a single door design for the floor 155 arranged to pivot into the interior of the second locker compartment when the prime mover moves the floor toward the second position, as opposed to first and second bomb-bay doors arranged to pivot into the interior of the second locker compartment when the prime mover moves the floor toward the second position. However, as evidenced by Dudley, such a configuration is known in the analogous art, see Fig. 2 and package locker 100 wherein the floor 105 comprises first and second bomb-bay doors arranged to pivot into the interior of the second (lower) locker compartment 205 when the prime mover 106 moves the floor toward the second (open) position. Therefore, as evidenced by Dudley, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cantrell by replacing its single door design for the floor with first and second bomb-bay doors. The rationale to support a conclusion that the claim would have been obvious is that the substitution of one known element for another yields predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art (See MPEP 2143 and KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007)). The substitution of the first and second bomb-bay doors would facilitate a slower, funneled drop of the package into the second locker compartment.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cantrell et al. (US#2019/0343317) in Ritchie (US#10028606).
Regarding claim 12, although Cantrell discloses a controller (CPU) of the prime mover 150 to move the floor 155 to the second position to permit the package to fall into the interior of the second (lower) locker compartment, Cantrell fails to disclose the controller configured to determine if the interior of the second locker compartment is empty and, after said determination, to control the prime mover to move the floor to the second position to permit the package to fall into the interior of the second locker compartment. However, as evidenced by Ritchie, such a configuration is known in the analogous art, see Fig. 5D, col. 14, lines 50-59, and package locker 550 including a controller 230 configured to determine via a light sensor if the interior of the second (lower) locker compartment 517 is empty (i.e. not full) to allow additional package delivery and prevent jamming of the locker. Therefore, as evidenced by Ritchie, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cantrell by including the controller capability of determining if the interior of the second locker compartment is empty (i.e. not full) and, after said determination, to control the prime mover to move the floor to the second position to permit the package to fall into the interior of the second locker compartment. The rational for supporting this conclusion of obviousness is the proposed combination is based upon combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. Moreover, all the claimed elements are known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could combine the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yield nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2143 and KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007)). The inclusion of the controller capability of determining if the interior of the second locker compartment is empty (i.e. not full) and, after said determination, to control the prime mover to move the floor to the second position to permit the package to fall into the interior of the second locker compartment, would prevent jamming of the locker.
Claim 31 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cantrell et al. (US#2019/0343317) in view of Eck et al. (US#2019/0152701).
Regarding claim 31, Cantrell fails to disclose a top locker compartment positioned on top of the first locker compartment and configured to receive the package from and subsequently deliver the package to the first locker compartment, the top locker compartment does not include a customer access door. However, as evidenced by Eck, such a configuration is known in the analogous art, see package locker 800 for receiving an aerial delivery 400 wherein a funnel shaped top locker compartment 814 is positioned on top of the first locker compartment 802 and is configured to receive the package 200 from and subsequently deliver the package to the first locker compartment, the top locker compartment does not include a customer access door. Therefore, as evidenced by Eck, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cantrell by including a funnel shaped top locker compartment positioned on top of the first locker compartment and configured to receive the package from and subsequently deliver the package to the first locker compartment, the top locker compartment does not include a customer access door. The rational for supporting this conclusion of obviousness is the proposed combination is based upon combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. Moreover, all the claimed elements are known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could combine the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yield nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2143 and KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007)). The inclusion of the funnel shaped top locker compartment positioned on top of the first locker compartment and configured to receive the package from and subsequently deliver the package to the first locker compartment, the top locker compartment does not include a customer access door, would safely guide the package from the UAV into the first compartment.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13-18, 20, 21, and 32-39 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 13 was amended to incorporate the previously indicated allowable subject matter of claim 19 (now canceled). Regarding claim 13, Cantrell (US#2019/0343317) discloses a package locker 100 comprising: a first locker compartment 124 having an interior sized and shaped to hold a package 190; a second locker compartment 126 underlying the first locker compartment, the second locker compartment having an interior sized and shaped to hold the package; a third locker compartment ([0017], additional compartment side-by-side with second compartment 126 via vertical partition panel in second locker compartment 126) having an interior sized and shaped to hold the package, the third locker compartment disposed side-by-side with the second locker compartment such that the interior of the third locker compartment is horizontally and vertically offset from the interior of the first locker compartment; and a package mover (movable floor 155) and configured to move the package from the interior of the first locker compartment to the interior of the third locker compartment. However, Cantrell fails to disclose or suggest the package mover comprises an active package mover configured to move the package from the interior of the second locker compartment to the interior of the third locker compartment. Cantrell teaches away from any such modification as it requires fixed vertical partition panels between the second and third locker compartments with no direct access therebetween.
Previously objected claim 16 was rewritten in independent form, including all of the limitations of the base claim 13. As discussed above, Cantrell (US#2019/0343317) discloses the first compartment includes a movable floor 155 and a side wall (vertical partition panel) between the second and third compartments. However, Cantrell fails to disclose the floor and the side wall being arrangeable in a ramp configuration where the floor overlaps the side wall such that the floor and side wall form a ramp along which the package can slide, under the influence of gravity, from the interior of the first locker compartment to the interior of the third locker compartment.
Previously objected claim 17 was rewritten in independent form, including all of the limitations of the base claim 13. As discussed above, Cantrell (US#2019/0343317) discloses the first compartment includes a movable floor 155 and a side wall (vertical partition panel) between the second and third compartments. However, Cantrell fails to discloses the side wall being moveable between a first position where the side wall separates the interiors of the second and third locker compartments and in a second position where the side wall is disposed in the interior of the second locker compartment and underlies the interior of the first locker compartment.
Response to Arguments
Regarding claim 1 and Cantrell (US#2019/0343317), the applicant argues the following:
“The undersigned cannot find any mention in Cantrell of a prime mover as recited in Claim 1. Cantrell, as best understood, merely states that its release panel 155 moves from a closed position to an open position. Cantrell does not provide disclosure of structure that performs this movement.”
The examiner disagrees as Cantrell explicitly discloses an actively powered prime mover 150 ([0056], “To that end, the exemplary method 500 of FIG. 5 includes providing a control unit 150 including a processor 410 and coupled to the release panel 155 (step 570) and causing, via the control unit 150, the release panel 155 to move from the closed position to the open position after a predefined interval of time of the package 190 being retained in the first storage compartment 124 without being retrieved by the customer 110 (step 580).”) operatively connected to the floor and configured to move the floor under power between the first and second positions.
Regarding claim 1 and Cantrell (US#2019/0343317), the applicant argues the following:
“Cantrell does not have both a first consumer access door and a second consumer access door as recited in claim 1. Cantrell has a first storage compartment 124 with a customer access opening 154 restricted by a movable cover 156. Cantrell does not have a consumer access door on its second storage compartment 126. Cantrell teaches that the second storage compartment 124 is with a delivery service access opening 164 restricted by a movable cover 166 configured to open and permit a delivery service operator to retrieve the package 190 from the second storage compartment 126 through the delivery service access opening 164. This movable cover 166 restricting access to the second storage compartment 126 via the delivery service access opening 164 is configured to be unlocked by the delivery service operator via electronic verification input (e.g., access code, biometric data, or the like), a physical key, or the like.1 Cantrell uses its timing function to move products to the second storage compartment that is accessible to delivery service workers. Cantrell does not teach or even suggest that a customer can access the second storage compartment.”
Cantrell discloses first and second access doors 156 and 166, respectively. These doors are being viewed and labeled as “consumer access doors” as they are capable of being used by a “consumer”. Claim 1 is not a method claim and the specific person which uses the doors represents the intended use of the invention. A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM L MILLER whose telephone number is (571)272-7068. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30 - 6:00 PM.
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, Jason San can be reached at (571) 272-6531. 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.
WILLIAM L. MILLER
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3677
/WILLIAM L MILLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3677
