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 .
The amendment filed 26 May 2026 has been entered.
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on 22 May 2026 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of Patent Number 12012293 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
Claim Interpretation
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: multi-axis movement mechanism, article-picking device, first gripping mechanism (Claims 1-8 and 17-19), second gripping mechanism (Claim 2), first gripping member, second gripping member (Claims 1-19), third gripping member, fourth gripping member (Claims 2, 14), and first stabilization member (Claims 5, 13). The term “member” is construed to be a generic placeholder.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
Claim(s) 9-10 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nakasono (JP 2006-62000 A).
Claim 9: a first gripping member having a first face (42) that is positioned opposite a second face of a second gripping member (other 42), wherein the first and second gripping members are adapted to transition from an open configuration to a closed configuration by laterally and linearly sliding toward each other through a common plane (figure 6);
Claim 10: wherein said first and second gripping members linearly sliding toward each other includes one or more of the following: (1) at least one of the first and second gripping members linearly sliding toward the other or (2) both of said first and second gripping members linearly sliding toward each other (figure 6);
Claim 12: wherein the closed configuration is characterized by the first and second gripping members being in common contact with a first article such that at least a portion of the first face is in contact with the first article and at least a portion of the second face is simultaneously in contact with the first article (figure 6).
Claim(s) 9 and 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lei (US 2020/0290825; Filed: Dec. 3, 2019; Prov. application, filed Mar. 14, 2019; current application, FIG. 8A et seq. with third and fourth gripping members are not disclosed in prov. appl. 62/889,294).
Claim 9: a first gripping member having a first face that is positioned opposite a second face of a second gripping member, wherein the first and second gripping members are adapted to transition from an open configuration to a closed configuration by laterally and linearly sliding toward each other through a common plane (“first grasping blade 310, the second grasping blade 312, the third grasping blade 314, and the fourth grasping blade 420”; “linear displacement”);
Claim 14: a third gripping member having a third face that is positioned opposite a fourth face of a fourth gripping member, wherein the third and fourth gripping members are adapted to transition from an open configuration to a closed configuration by laterally and linearly sliding toward each other through a common plane (“first grasping blade 310, the second grasping blade 312, the third grasping blade 314, and the fourth grasping blade 420”; “linear displacement”; FIG. 7 shows common plane of gripping members with the same profiles/etc.);
Claim 15: one or more sensors operable to facilitate transitioning from the open configuration to the closed configuration (“first position sensor 510 and the third position sensor 514, and the second position sensor 512 and the fourth position sensor 516”; “the gripper 122 can be configured with the orientation sensor 702 proximate to the second grasping blade 312.”; para. [0143]/[0164]);
Claim 16: wherein the one or more sensors comprise one or more of a fixed field sensor, a reflective sensor, or a proximity sensor (para. [0143]/[0164]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 1, 5, 7-8, 11, and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakasono in view of Tetsuji Kosen (JP 6-45948 U) (“Tetsuji”). Nakasono discloses all the limitations of the claims as discussed above; and
Claim 1: a multi-axis movement mechanism (9; para. [0019]) coupled to an article-picking device (11/12) that includes a first gripping mechanism comprising a first gripping member (42) and a second gripping member (other 42)
a storage system that includes a first cartridge (8 for “containing one or more articles”) that is adapted to hold a first article and a plurality of second articles (figure 7), wherein the article-picking device is adapted to retrieve the first article from the first cartridge by utilizing the first gripping member to grasp a wrapping of the first article when the first gripping member is in the closed configuration (figure 6(d) where W picked-up by upper surface wrapping the inside matter of W);
Claim 5: wherein the first gripping member further includes a first stabilization member that extends laterally from the first gripping member and is adapted to stabilize the first article when it is picked (41 aids in stabilizing W);
Claim 7: wherein the wrapping is made from one or more of the following: plastic, cellophane, paper, tissue, or foil (para. [0002], plastic);
Claim 8: wherein the wrapping includes one or more of the following: a covering that covers all the first article, a material that covers only a portion of the first article, or a band (figure 6(d) where W picked-up by upper surface wrapping the inside matter of W is a covering).
Nakasono does not directly show:
Claim 1: a second gripping member spaced apart fewer than two inches in an open configuration and at least one of the first or second gripping members;
Claim 11: wherein the open configuration is characterized by the first and second gripping members being separated by fewer than two inches;
Claim 13: wherein the first gripping member further includes a first stabilization member that extends laterally from the first gripping member and is adapted to stabilize the first article when it is picked.
Tetsuji shows a similar device having:
Claim 1: a second gripping member spaced apart fewer than two inches in an open configuration and at least one of the first or second gripping members (para. [0011], about 0.1 mm < 2 inches);
Claim 11: wherein the open configuration is characterized by the first and second gripping members being separated by fewer than two inches (para. [0011], about 0.1 mm < 2 inches);
Claim 13: wherein the first gripping member further includes a first stabilization member that extends laterally from the first gripping member and is adapted to stabilize the first article when it is picked (body of 11 in figures 7-8 help stabilize first article 10);
with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of ensuring that the article is properly lifted to reduce the possibility of dropping the article (para. [0003]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nakasono as taught by Tetsuji and include Tetsuji’s similar device having:
Claim 1: a second gripping member spaced apart fewer than two inches in an open configuration and at least one of the first or second gripping members;
Claim 11: wherein the open configuration is characterized by the first and second gripping members being separated by fewer than two inches;
Claim 13: wherein the first gripping member further includes a first stabilization member that extends laterally from the first gripping member and is adapted to stabilize the first article when it is picked;
with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of ensuring that the article is properly lifted to reduce the possibility of dropping the article.
Claim(s) 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirata et al. (US 2020/0198157; 102(a)(2) date: Aug. 31, 2017) (“Hirata”) in view of Martin et al. (US 2011/0071666) (“Martin”). Hirata discloses:
Claim 17: utilizing a multi-axis movement mechanism (100) to transport an article-picking device (1)
utilizing the article-picking device to retrieve an article (article inside P1 in FIG. 5)
Claim 19: wherein each of the [containers] is adapted to contain a plurality of greeting cards (P1 is adapted to contain a plurality of greeting cards).
Hirata does not directly show:
Claim 17: transport an article-picking device to a storage system that includes a plurality of cartridges, wherein each of the plurality of cartridges is adapted to contain a plurality of articles;
transporting the article to a conveyance system;
Claim 18: wherein utilizing the article-picking device to retrieve an article comprises inserting at least a portion of the article-picking device into an interior portion of the one of the plurality of cartridges;
Claim 19: wherein each of the plurality of cartridges is adapted to contain a plurality of greeting cards.
Martin shows a similar device having:
Claim 17: transport an article-picking device to a storage system that includes a plurality of cartridges, wherein each of the plurality of cartridges is adapted to contain a plurality of articles (230a-230c);
Claim 18: wherein utilizing the article-picking device to retrieve an article comprises inserting at least a portion of the article-picking device into an interior portion of the one of the plurality of cartridges (FIG. 2/etc.);
Claim 19: wherein each of the plurality of cartridges is adapted to contain a plurality of greeting cards (234 of Martin are adapted to being within P1 of Hirata);
with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of increasing the number of storage devices to decrease the cost of providing multiple retrieving devices (para. [0006]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hirata as taught by Martin and include Martin’s similar device having:
Claim 17: transport an article-picking device to a storage system that includes a plurality of cartridges, wherein each of the plurality of cartridges is adapted to contain a plurality of articles;
Claim 18: wherein utilizing the article-picking device to retrieve an article comprises inserting at least a portion of the article-picking device into an interior portion of the one of the plurality of cartridges;
Claim 19: wherein each of the plurality of cartridges is adapted to contain a plurality of greeting cards;
with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of increasing the number of storage devices to decrease the cost of providing multiple retrieving devices.
Claim(s) 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakasono in view of Tetsuji and Stiernagle et al. (US 2016/0325933) (“Stiernagle”). Nakasono discloses all the limitations of the claims as discussed above.
Nakasono does not directly show:
Claim 3: wherein the storage system comprises a storage unit that includes a plurality of shelves vertically spaced apart from one another, and wherein each of the plurality of shelves is adapted to hold a portion of a plurality of cartridges in addition to the first cartridge;
Claim 4: wherein each of the plurality of shelves is coupled to a cartridge conveyance system, and wherein the cartridge conveyance system comprises a plurality of tracks adapted to transport one or more cartridges to the plurality of shelves.
Stiernagle shows a similar device having:
Claim 3: wherein the storage system comprises a storage unit that includes a plurality of shelves vertically spaced apart from one another (shelves for 230/etc.), and wherein each of the plurality of shelves is adapted to hold a portion of a plurality of cartridges in addition to the first cartridge (230/etc.);
Claim 4: wherein each of the plurality of shelves is coupled to a cartridge conveyance system, and wherein the cartridge conveyance system comprises a plurality of tracks (372/373/etc.) adapted to transport one or more cartridges to the plurality of shelves;
with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of increasing efficiency by increasing access to multiple storage units (para. [0064]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nakasono and Tetsuji as taught by Stiernagle and include Stiernagle’s similar device having:
Claim 3: wherein the storage system comprises a storage unit that includes a plurality of shelves vertically spaced apart from one another, and wherein each of the plurality of shelves is adapted to hold a portion of a plurality of cartridges in addition to the first cartridge;
Claim 4: wherein each of the plurality of shelves is coupled to a cartridge conveyance system, and wherein the cartridge conveyance system comprises a plurality of tracks adapted to transport one or more cartridges to the plurality of shelves;
with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of increasing efficiency by increasing access to multiple storage units.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakasono in view of Tetsuji and Davidson et al. (US 2016/0073584) (“Davidson”). Nakasono discloses all the limitations of the claims as discussed above.
Nakasono does not directly show:
Claim 6: wherein the system is adapted to retrieve the first article from the first cartridge and transport the article to a conveyance system in ten seconds or fewer.
Davidson shows a similar device having:
Claim 6: wherein the system is adapted to retrieve the first article from the first cartridge and transport the article to a conveyance system in ten seconds or fewer (para. [0048], 6 seconds or less; it is noted that para. [0010] discloses “approximately nine seconds”);
with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of minimizing damage to the article during conveyance (para. [0005]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nakasono and Tetsuji as taught by Davidson and include Davidson’s similar device having:
Claim 6: wherein the system is adapted to retrieve the first article from the first cartridge and transport the article to a conveyance system in ten seconds or fewer;
with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of minimizing damage to the article during conveyance.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 2 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 26 May 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive except for the objections, double patenting rejections, and 112(b) rejection which are withdrawn.
Re. the 112(f) claim interpretation, the generic placeholders are not a closed set. The terms mechanism, element, and member may be generic placeholders. It is noted that “article-picking device” is not construed under 112(f) for Claims 9-16 since at least one limitation is a structure for the article-picking device.
Re. p. 4, section IV, clearly both 42’s open/close and slide as claimed within a common plane at least when they move as shown in figure 6.
Re. pp. 5-6 re. Lei, clearly 310/312 are configured to open/close and slide as claimed within a common plane with 100/104 at least when they move as described in Lei via the mechanism shown in FIG. 4/9-10 and at least para. [0109].
Re. pp. 7-8, section V, clearly the upper surface wrapping the inside matter of W may be construed to be the wrapping of an object. The rationale of “ensuring that the article is properly lifted to reduce the possibility of dropping the article” was provided for the combination above.
Re. the second-to-last para. of p. 1, 41 aids in stabilizing W as claimed. Re. the last para. of the page, clearly the upper surface wrapping the inside matter of W may be construed to be the wrapping of an object.
Re. Claim 5, p. 2, all the prior art used in the rejections are used for gripping and transferring articles. It has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of the inventor’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992). Re. the rationale, the rationale of “ensuring that the article is properly lifted to reduce the possibility of dropping the article” was provided for the combination above.
Re. p. 3, second full para., cloth and foil wrapping are at least equivalent. The rationale for combination was provided above.
Re. Claims 3-4, all the prior art used in the rejections are used for gripping and transferring articles. It has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of the inventor’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992). The rationale for combination was provided above.
Re. Claim 6, all the prior art used in the rejections are used for gripping and transferring articles. It has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of the inventor’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992). The rationale for combination was provided above.
Re. pp. 7-8, clearly both 42’s open/close and slide as claimed within a common plane at least when they move as shown in figure 6.
Re. pp. 9-11 re. Lei, clearly 310/312 are configured to open/close and slide as claimed within a common plane with 100/104 at least when they move as described in Lei via the mechanism shown in FIG. 4/9-10 and at least para. [0109].
Re. Claims 11/13, all the prior art used in the rejections are used for gripping and transferring articles. It has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of the inventor’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992). The rationale for combination was provided above.
Re. pp. 12-13 re. Claims 17-19, clearly the upper surface wrapping the inside matter of W may be construed to be the wrapping of an object. The rationale of “ensuring that the article is properly lifted to reduce the possibility of dropping the article” was provided for the combination above. All the prior art used in the rejections are used for gripping and transferring articles. It has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of the inventor’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992). The rationale for combination was provided above.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Gerald McClain whose telephone number is (571)272-7803. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday from 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and at gerald.mcclain@uspto.gov (see MPEP 502.03 (II)).
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, Saul Rodriguez can be reached at (571) 272-7097. 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.
/Gerald McClain/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3652
Prosecution Insights