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 .
Claim Status
Claim 2 has been canceled. Claims 1 and 3-7 are pending in the application and have been examined.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/23/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments that Kitamura do not disclose the claimed limitations of claim 1 have been considered but are moot as the current rejection cites features of a different embodiment. The previous rejection relied upon Embodiment 1 and the current rejection relies upon Embodiment 2. See the rejection below for additional details and specific citation.
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kitamura et al. (US 2022/0046509 A1) hereinafter Kitamura.
Claim 1:
Kitamura discloses an article transport facility [Figs. 16, 18], comprising: a transport vehicle configured to move along a prescribed path [5; ¶195] to transport an article [101]; a control device configured to control the transport vehicle [400]; and a plurality of access points, each of which configured to perform wireless communication with the transport vehicle [¶194], wherein the control device and the transport vehicle are configured to be communicable with each other in both directions via any of the plurality of access points [¶¶193-194; Fig. 15], and wherein the control device transmits a task execution command for executing a task for communication recovery to the transport vehicle, as communication from the control device to the transport vehicle is valid, when communication from the transport vehicle to the control device is interrupted and the control device is unable to confirm a response from the transport vehicle, [Fig. 17, specifically S605-S608; ¶¶223-231]; wherein the task execution command comprises a point switching command for causing the transport vehicle to switch the access points of connection destinations [¶225], and wherein the transport vehicle executes the task in accordance with the task execution command, in response to receiving the task execution command [S607; ¶226].
Claim 3:
Kitamura, as shown in the rejection above, discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Kitamura also discloses wherein the command comprises a movement command for moving the transport vehicle from a current position [¶219].
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(s) 4-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kitamura as applied to claims 1-3 above, and further in view of Matsumoto et al. (US 2022/0377815 A1) hereinafter Matsumoto.
Claim 4:
Kitamura, as shown in the rejection above, discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Kitamura also discloses wherein: the control device is configured to repeatedly transmit a confirmation signal to the transport vehicle at a set cycle [¶¶238-242; a set cycle is a predetermined cycle which is shown in the feedback, "no" between S605, 608], the transport vehicle is configured to transmit a reception signal to the control device in accordance with receiving of the confirmation signal [¶¶223-227, reception signal is the indication to controller than communication with "IF" is possible].
Kitamura doesn’t explicitly disclose the control device executes cycle change processing of changing the set cycle to be shorter when the control device does not receive the reception signal from the transport vehicle within a predetermined set period.
However, Matsumoto does disclose the control device executes cycle change processing of changing the set cycle to be shorter when the control device does not receive the reception signal from the transport vehicle within a predetermined set period. [¶152]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the transportation system of Kitamura with the reconnection method of Matsumoto so that the reconnection time required or transition from the disconnected state to the connected state is prevented from being made longer [¶152].
Claim 5:
Kitamura and Matsumoto, as shown in the rejection above, discloses all the limitations of claim 4.
Kitamura also discloses wherein the control device certifies the transport vehicle as a communication failure vehicle [¶¶223-229] when a state in which the control device does not receive the reception signal from the transport vehicle continues for a predetermined certification reference period [this could be interpreted as any amount of time greater than 0 seconds], and wherein the control device stores information on the transport vehicle certified as the communication failure vehicle and information on a position of the transport vehicle at a time of certification in association with each other [position information is sent before wireless communication is lost ¶220].
Claim 6:
Kitamura, as shown in the rejection above, discloses all the limitations of claim 2.
Kitamura also discloses wherein: the control device is configured to repeatedly transmit a confirmation signal to the transport vehicle at a set cycle [¶¶238-242; a set cycle is a predetermined cycle which is shown in the feedback, "no" between S605, 608], the transport vehicle is configured to transmit a reception signal to the control device in accordance with receiving of the confirmation signal [¶¶223-227, reception signal is the indication to controller than communication with "IF" is possible].
Kitamura doesn’t explicitly disclose the control device executes cycle change processing of changing the set cycle to be shorter when the control device does not receive the reception signal from the transport vehicle within a predetermined set period.
However, Matsumoto does disclose the control device executes cycle change processing of changing the set cycle to be shorter when the control device does not receive the reception signal from the transport vehicle within a predetermined set period. [¶152]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the transportation system of Kitamura with the reconnection method of Matsumoto so that the reconnection time required or transition from the disconnected state to the connected state is prevented from being made longer [¶152].
Claim 7:
Kitamura, as shown in the rejection above, discloses all the limitations of claim 3.
Kitamura also discloses wherein: the control device is configured to repeatedly transmit a confirmation signal to the transport vehicle at a set cycle [¶¶238-242; a set cycle is a predetermined cycle which is shown in the feedback, "no" between S605, 608], the transport vehicle is configured to transmit a reception signal to the control device in accordance with receiving of the confirmation signal [¶¶223-227, reception signal is the indication to controller than communication with "IF" is possible].
Kitamura doesn’t explicitly disclose the control device executes cycle change processing of changing the set cycle to be shorter when the control device does not receive the reception signal from the transport vehicle within a predetermined set period.
However, Matsumoto does disclose the control device executes cycle change processing of changing the set cycle to be shorter when the control device does not receive the reception signal from the transport vehicle within a predetermined set period. [¶152]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the transportation system of Kitamura with the reconnection method of Matsumoto so that the reconnection time required or transition from the disconnected state to the connected state is prevented from being made longer [¶152].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Korn (US 2010/0318288 A1) discloses a system and method of locating a vehicle.
Suzuki (US 9,086,697 B2) discloses a factory transport system for moving workpieces, such as semiconductor containers, between multiple processing machines and storage locations.
Shibata (US 2013/0195588 A1) discloses an article transport facility in which reduction in the transport capacity can be prevented while simplifying the structure and making the facility less expensive.
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 KURT P LIETHEN whose telephone number is (313)446-6596. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri, 8 AM - 4 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, Lindsay Low can be reached at (571)272-1196. 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.
KURT P. LIETHEN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3747
/KURT PHILIP LIETHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747
Prosecution Insights