DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
2. Applicant’s election with traverse of election of Species A corresponding to claims 1-20 for prosecution on merits filed on 11/04/2025 is acknowledged.
3. The restriction requirement among inventions, as set forth in the Office action mailed on 10/09/2025 has been reconsidered. The restriction requirement is hereby withdrawn. Specifically, the restriction requirement of 10/09/2025 is withdrawn.
Claims 1-20, as originally filed, are currently pending and have been considered below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
5. Claims 1, 2, 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Canoso et al. (USP 2019/0111955) in view of Cheol (KR-2017-0135440) in view of Zajac (USP 2024/0416822).
As Per Claim 1, Canoso et al. ( Canoso) discloses, a delivery robot (300, 102) comprising: a body housing (302) including a storage (130, [0045]) defined therein and a body opening defined in a front surface thereof; a door (142,312,314,316), [0062], [0063],[0057], [0027], [0030], [0039],[0045], [0047], Fig.1,3A), configured to operate either in a closed state to cover the body opening or an open state to open the body opening; ([0057-0059]); a controller (150) configured to operate the door in response to a control command; ([0045], [0046], [0053], [0054], [0064]); a middle shelf (307) mountable to the body housing (302), the middle shelf (307) configured to partition the storage(130) into an upper storage section (above 307) and a lower storage section; (370, see [0068], Fig.3C); a first elastic sensor ( see [0051], [0059]) located in one of the shelf supports, the first elastic sensor being configured to detect mounting of the middle shelf (307) by being retracted when the middle shelf is mounted. (see [0051], [0057]-[0059]).
However, Canoso does not explicitly teach, shelf supports protruding from a left side surface of the storage and a right side surface of the storage, respectively; shelf rails at a left side of the middle shelf and a right side of the middle shelf, the shelf rails being insertable into the shelf supports.
In a related field of art, Cheol teaches, a refrigerator , wherein, shelf supports protruding from a left side surface of the storage and a right side surface of the storage, respectively; shelf rails at a left side of the middle shelf and a right side of the middle shelf, ( Abstract, Page 4, last 2 para –Page 5, last para; Page 6 last 2 para –Page 7 first 2 para , Figs. 2-3).
In a related field of Art, Zajac teaches, systems and methods for adjustable mobile storage for vehicle cargo, wherein, the shelf rails being insertable into the shelf supports. ( via a vehicle including a cargo storage compartment having a plurality of rails on compartment side walls and rails may be fixed may not be fixed to the compartment side walls [0025], [0030]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Canoso, Cheol and Zajac before him before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the systems of Canoso, to include the teachings of Cheol and Zajac and configure with the system of Canoso in order to have shelf support protruding from left side and right side and shelf rails be not fixed ( insertable) with the storage wall. Motivation to combine the two teachings is, ease of shelf and rail assembly on the mobile robot.
As per Claim 2, Canoso as modified by Cheol and Zajac teaches the limitation of Claim 1. However, Canoso in view of Cheol and Zajac teaches, wherein the door includes: an upper door configured to open and close the upper storage section; and a lower door configured to open and close the lower storage section,( Fig. 3A, 312, 314), and wherein the controller ((150) is configured to operate the upper door and the lower door individually when the first elastic sensor detects the middle shelf , ([0045], [0046], [0053], [0054], [0064]) , also, see [0068], Fig.3C).
As per Claim 15, Canoso as modified by Cheol and Zajac teaches the limitation of Claim 1. However, Canoso in view of Cheol and Zajac teaches, wherein a first surface of the middle shelf is a flat surface ( Canoso: Fig. 3C).
However, Canoso in view of Cheol and Zajac does not explicitly teach, a second surface of the middle shelf includes a plurality of cup holders.
However, a second surface of the middle shelf including a plurality of cup holders, would be an obvious matter of design choice, In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975).
As Per Claim 16, Canoso et al. (Canoso) discloses, a delivery robot (300, 102)
comprising: a body housing (302) including a storage (130, [0045]) defined therein and a body opening defined in a front surface thereof; [0062], [0063],[0057], [0027], [0030], [0039],[0045], [0047], Fig.1,3A); a middle shelf (307) mountable to the body housing (302), the middle shelf (307) configured to partition the storage(130) into an upper storage section (above 307) and a lower storage section;(370, see [0068], Fig.3C); an upper door (312) configured to operate either in a closed state to cover the upper storage section or an open state to open the upper storage section; a lower door (314) configured to operate either in a closed state to cover the lower storage section or an open state to open the lower storage section; ([0063-0065]), Figs. 3A-3C) ([0045], [0046], [0053], [0054], [0064]); shelf supports protruding from a left side surface of the storage and a right side surface of the storage, respectively; shelf rails at a left side of the middle shelf and a right side of the middle shelf, the shelf rails being insertable into the shelf supports; a first elastic sensor ( see [0051], [0059]) located in one of the shelf supports, the first elastic sensor being configured to detect mounting of the middle shelf (307) by being retracted when the middle shelf is mounted; and a controller (150) configured to operate the upper door and the lower door individually when the first elastic sensor detects the middle shelf. (see [0051], [0057]-[0059]).
However, Canoso does not explicitly teach, shelf supports protruding from a left side surface of the storage and a right side surface of the storage, respectively; shelf rails at a left side of the middle shelf and a right side of the middle shelf, the shelf rails being insertable into the shelf supports.
However, Canoso does not explicitly teach, shelf supports protruding from a left side surface of the storage and a right side surface of the storage, respectively; shelf rails at a left side of the middle shelf and a right side of the middle shelf, the shelf rails being insertable into the shelf supports.
In a related field of art, Cheol teaches, a refrigerator , wherein, shelf supports protruding from a left side surface of the storage and a right side surface of the storage, respectively; shelf rails at a left side of the middle shelf and a right side of the middle shelf, ( Abstract, Page 4, last 2 para –Page 5, last para; Page 6 last 2 para –Page 7 first 2 para , Figs. 2-3).
In a related field of Art, Zajac teaches, systems and methods for adjustable mobile storage for vehicle cargo, wherein, the shelf rails being insertable into the shelf supports. ( via a vehicle including a cargo storage compartment having a plurality of rails on compartment side walls and rails may be fixed may not be fixed to the compartment side walls [0025], [0030]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Canoso, Cheol and Zajac before him before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the systems of Canoso, to include the teachings of Cheol and Zajac and configure with the system of Canoso in order to have shelf support protruding from left side and right side and shelf rails be not fixed ( insertable) with the storage wall. Motivation to combine the two teachings is, ease of shelf and rail assembly on the mobile robot.
Allowable Subject Matter
6. Claims 3-14 and 17-20 are 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
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MUHAMMAD SHAFI whose telephone number is (571)270-5741. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 am -5:00 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, Scott Browne can be reached at 571-270-0151. 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.
/MUHAMMAD SHAFI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3666C