DETAILED ACTION
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
This is the first Office Action on the merits. Claims 1-20 are currently pending and addressed below.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Should applicant desire to obtain the benefit of foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) prior to declaration of an interference, a certified English translation of the foreign application must be submitted in reply to this action. 37 CFR 41.154(b) and 41.202(e).
Failure to provide a certified translation may result in no benefit being accorded for the non-English application. No action on the part of the applicant is required at this time.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 2/25/2025 was filed before the mailing date of the present Office Action. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
(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.
Claims 1-9, 11-13, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CN219258110 to Wang et al.
Regarding claim 1, Wang et al. discloses:
A delivery robot (Figure 1-1 depicting a delivery robot)) comprising:
a body housing including a storage defined therein and a body opening defined in a front surface of the body housing (Figures 1-1 and 1-2 depicting a body housing having storage therein and an opening defined in the front surface of the housing); and
a door configured to operate either in a closed state to cover the body opening or an open state to open the body opening (Figures 1-1 and 1-2 depicting the door assembly 2 in an open state and a closed state), the door including:
a door panel configured to cover the body opening at the front surface of the body housing in the closed state and to slide in a lateral direction of the body housing when moving between the closed state to the open state (Figure 2-1 depicting door panel 21; Figure 4 depicting the door panels sliding in a later direction of the body when moving between open and closed states);
a first door link having a first end pivotably coupled to the door panel and a second end pivotably coupled to the body housing (Figure 2-1 depicting a first door link 25 pivotably coupled to the door panel 21 and coupled to the body housing at Ref. No. 251); and
a motor configured to provide a pivoting force to the first door link, wherein an angular orientation of the door panel in the open state is different from an angular orientation of the door panel in the closed state (Figure 2-1 depicting motor 26 to provide a pivoting force to the first door link; Figure 4 showing the different angular orientation of the door panel in a closed and open state).
Regarding claim 2, Wang et al. discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Wang et al further discloses:
wherein the door panel includes a first edge, the first edge being located at one portion of the body opening in the closed state, the first edge being configured to move to another portion of the body opening in the open state, and wherein the first end of the first door link is coupled to the first edge (Figures 1-1 and 1-2 depicting the door panel’s edge in different positions when opened and closed).
Regarding claim 3, Wang et al. discloses all the limitations of claim 2. Wang et al further discloses:
wherein the first end of the first door link is bent in a direction of the first edge of the door panel (Figure 5-1 depicting the first end of the first door link being bent in a direction of the first edge).
Regarding claim 4, Wang et al. discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Wang et al further discloses:
a second door link having a first end coupled to the door panel and a second end coupled to the body housing, wherein a first spacing between the first end and the second end of the first door link is greater than a second spacing between the first end and the second end of the second door link (Figure 5-1 depicting the first door link longer than the second door link).
Regarding claim 5, Wang et al. discloses all the limitations of claim 4. Wang et al further discloses:
wherein the second door link includes a bent portion bent in a U-shape such that the first end and the second end face in a same direction (Figure 5-2 depicting the u-shaped bend of the second door link where the ends are facing the same direction).
Regarding claim 6, Wang et al. discloses all the limitations of claim 5. Wang et al further discloses:
wherein the second door link includes:
a first portion extending from a first side of the bent portion, the first portion including the first end coupled to the door; and a second portion extending from a second side of the bent portion, the second portion including the second end coupled to the body, and wherein a length of the second portion is less than a length of the first portion (Figure 5-1 depicting a first portion extending from a first bent side and being coupled to the door, and a second portion extending from the other side of the link that is coupled to the body, wherein the length of the second portion is less than the first).
Regarding claim 7, Wang et al. discloses all the limitations of claim 6. Wang et al further discloses:
wherein the door panel includes a front portion located at one surface of the body housing and a side portion curved laterally from the one surface, and wherein the first end of the second door link is coupled to the door panel at a location where the front portion transitions to the side portion (Figure 5-1 depicting a front portion of the panel being flat and a side portion that is curved from the flat surface, and the second door link is coupled to the panel where the flat portion transitions into the curved portion).
Regarding claim 8, Wang et al. discloses all the limitations of claim 7. Wang et al further discloses:
wherein the second end of the second door link is pivotably coupled to the body housing adjacent to an end of the body opening (Figure 5-1 depicting the second end of the second link coupled to the body near a body opening).
Regarding claim 9, Wang et al. discloses all the limitations of claim 8. Wang et al further discloses:
wherein the second door link includes a pair of second door links disposed at an upper side of the door panel and a lower side of the door panel, respectively (Figure 1-1 depicting a pair of second door links on an upper side of the door panel and a lower side of the door panel).
Regarding claim 11, Wang et al. discloses all the limitations of claim 4. Wang et al further discloses:
wherein the door panel includes a front portion located at one surface of the body housing and a side portion curved laterally from the one surface, and wherein the first end of the second door link is coupled to the door panel at a location where the front portion transitions to the side portion (Figure 5-1 depicting a front portion of the panel being flat and a side portion that is curved from the flat surface, and the second door link is coupled to the panel where the flat portion transitions into the curved portion).
Regarding claim 12, Wang et al. discloses all the limitations of claim 4. Wang et al further discloses:
wherein the second end of the second door link is pivotably coupled to the body housing adjacent to an end of the body opening (Figure 5-1 depicting the second end of the second link coupled to the body near a body opening).
Regarding claim 13, Wang et al. discloses all the limitations of claim 4. Wang et al further discloses:
wherein the second door link includes a pair of second door links disposed at an upper side of the door panel and a lower side of the door panel, respectively (Figure 1-1 depicting a pair of second door links on an upper side of the door panel and a lower side of the door panel).
Regarding claim 20, Wang et al. discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Wang et al further discloses:
wherein the door includes four doors arranged 2x2 in a vertical direction and a left and right direction, wherein a door of the four doors that is located on a left side and a door of the four doors that is located on a right side operate in symmetrical directions (Figure 6 depicting the four symmetrical doors in a 4x4 pattern), and
wherein the delivery robot includes a controller configured to selectively operate the four doors (Page 4, ll. 28 – 37 describing that each of the four doors are provided with independent door assemblies and have independent automatic opening and closing).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claims 10 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. in view of U.S. Pub. No. 2024/0217593 to Lossov et al.
Regarding claim 10, Wang et al. discloses all the limitations of claim 9. Wang et al further discloses:
a middle shelf partitioning the storage into an upper storage section and a lower storage section (Figure 6 depicting the storage being divided into an upper storage and a lower storage by a middle shelf partition),
wherein the door includes:
an upper door configured to open and close the upper storage section (Figure 6 upper door 1); and
a lower door configured to open and close the lower storage section (Figure 6 lower door 2), and
wherein one of the pair of second door links coupled to the door panel is located in a lateral direction of the middle shelf (Figure 4 depicting the door links located in a lateral direction of the middle shelf).
Wang et al. does not expressly disclose the middle shelf being detachable from the body housing.
Lossov et al., in the same field of endeavor, teaches removal middle shelves (¶ [0058] describing installing and removing middle shelves that partition the storage into different sizes).
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 Wang et al.’s invention to incorporate detachable middle shelves, as taught by Lossov et al., with a reasonable expectation of success in allowing the size of the storage compartments to be modified dynamically depending on the need (Lossov et al. ¶ [0058]).
Regarding claim 14, Wang et al. discloses all the limitations of claim 13. Wang et al further discloses:
a middle shelf partitioning the storage into an upper storage section and a lower storage section (Figure 6 depicting the storage being divided into an upper storage and a lower storage by a middle shelf partition),
wherein the door includes:
an upper door configured to open and close the upper storage section (Figure 6 upper door 1); and
a lower door configured to open and close the lower storage section (Figure 6 lower door 2), and
wherein one of the pair of second door links coupled to the door panel is located in a lateral direction of the middle shelf (Figure 4 depicting the door links located in a lateral direction of the middle shelf).
Wang et al. does not expressly disclose the middle shelf being detachable from the body housing.
Lossov et al., in the same field of endeavor, teaches removal middle shelves (¶ [0058] describing installing and removing middle shelves that partition the storage into different sizes).
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 Wang et al.’s invention to incorporate detachable middle shelves, as taught by Lossov et al., with a reasonable expectation of success in allowing the size of the storage compartments to be modified dynamically depending on the need (Lossov et al. ¶ [0058]).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. in view of U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0212455 to Jung et al.
Regarding claim 15, Wang et al. discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Wang et al. does not expressly disclose a first pulley connected to the motor; a second pulley connected to the first door link; and a belt surrounding the first pulley and the second pulley to define a closed loop.
Jung et al., in the same field of endeavor, teaches a first pulley connected to the motor; a second pulley connected to the first door link; and a belt surrounding the first pulley and the second pulley to define a closed loop (¶¶ [0231] – [0236] describing the pulleys and drive motor).
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 Wang et al.’s invention to incorporate a pulley system, as taught by Jung et al., with a reasonable expectation of success in allowing the driving system to be disposed in a position other than above or under a tray space that would interfere with the storage area (Jung et al. ¶ [0041]). Furthermore, a person having ordinary skill in the art would recognized this as a simple substitution of one known mechanism for opening and closing doors with another known mechanism for opening and closing doors, leading to the predictable results of opening and closing the delivery robot door.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. and Jung et al., as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of U.S. Pub. No. 2023/0001588 to Morita.
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Wang et al. and Jung et al. renders obvious all the limitations of claim 15.
Neither Wang et al. nor Jung et al. expressly disclose wherein a diameter of the first pulley is less than a diameter of the second pulley.
Morita, solving the same problem of actuating a component of the robot using a pulley system, teaches wherein a diameter of the first pulley is less than a diameter of the second pulley (¶ [0023] describing that the diameter of the drive-side pulley is smaller than the diameter of the driven-side pulley).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Wang et al.’s invention to incorporate the first pulley having a smaller diameter than the second pulley, as taught by Morita, with a reasonable expectation of success in obtaining a pulley ratio smaller than 1 to allow for one pulley to rotate less than a full rotation while the other pulley rotates a full rotation (Morita at ¶¶ [0038] – [0042]).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. and Jung et al., as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of CN219008998 to Xia et al.
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Wang et al. and Jung et al. renders obvious all the limitations of claim 15.
Neither Wang et al. nor Jung et al. expressly disclose a sensing protrusion protruding from one side of an outer circumferential surface of the second pulley; a closing detection sensor configured to come into contact with the sensing protrusion when the door panel is in the closed state; and an opening detection sensor configured to come into contact with the sensing protrusion when the door panel is in the open state.
Xia et al., in the same field of endeavor, teaches a sensing protrusion protruding from one side of an outer circumferential surface of the second pulley; a closing detection sensor configured to come into contact with the sensing protrusion when the door panel is in the closed state; and an opening detection sensor configured to come into contact with the sensing protrusion when the door panel is in the open state (Page 7, ll. 11-26 describing a protrusion that contacts a door open signal emitted from an infrared sensor when the door is open, and a door closing signal that is emitted from a second infrared signal when the door is closed).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Wang et al.’s invention to incorporate a sensor system comprising a contact sensor for detecting when the door was closed and a sensor to detect when the door was open, as taught by Xia et al., with a reasonable expectation of success in allowing the control to know when to stop operation when opening and closing the door (Xia et al. at Page 3, ll. 12-20).
Claims 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. in view of U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0223632 to Melanson et al.
Regarding claim 18, Wang et al. discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Wang et al. further discloses:
wherein the first door link pivots in a first pivot direction to switch the door panel from the closed state to the open state (Figures 1-1, 1-2, 2-1, and 4 depicting the first link pivoting when moving from an open to a close state),
Wang et al. does not expressly disclose a locking lever located in the first pivot direction of the first door link; and a locking motor configured to remove the locking lever from a pivoting range of the first door link when the door panel moves from the closed state to the open state.
Melanson et al., in the same field of endeavor, teaches a locking lever located in the first pivot direction of the first door link; and a locking motor configured to remove the locking lever from a pivoting range of the first door link when the door panel moves from the closed state to the open state (¶ [0079] describing the locking lever that locks the door shut when in a closed state, but removes the level via motor when the door moves to an open state).
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 Wang et al.’s invention to incorporate a locking lever, as taught by Melanson et al., with a reasonable expectation of success in delivering secured items in lockable containers (Melanson et al. at ¶ [0006]).
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Wang et al. and Melanson et al. renders obvious all the limitations of claim 18. Melanson et al. further teaches:
wherein the locking lever is configured to be removable from the pivoting range of the first door link when pressed manually (¶ [0007] describing a user manual disengaging the lock by pressing a key pad associated with the locking lever).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Wang et al.’s invention to incorporate a manual locking lever, as taught by Melanson et al., with a reasonable expectation of success in delivering secured items in lockable containers and providing a secure means for a user to access the items (Melanson et al. at ¶¶ [0006], [0007]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Pub. No. 2023/0160251 to Khalizov et al. teaches a delivery robot with partitionable storage (Figure 4 and description thereof);
U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0188550 to Kim et al. teaches a delivery robot with partitional storage (Figure 3 and description thereof; ¶¶ [0102] – [0107]);
U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0300676 to Peterson et al. teaches a delivery robot that is partitionable and includes a door that opens in a lateral direction (Figure 6B and description thereof).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN D HOLMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5291. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30am-5pm ET.
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, Hitesh Patel can be reached at 571-270-5442. 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.
/JOHN D HOLMAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3667
Prosecution Insights