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 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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 8, 14-16, and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sun (US 2021/0122046).
Re claims 1, 19, and 20, Sun discloses a robotic system, comprising:
a communication interface configured to receive image data (cameras 112, 114, and 116); and
a processor coupled to the communication interface (control computer 122) and configured to:
use the image data to identify an item associated with a topmost receptacle in a stack of one or more stackable receptacles (see at least para. 31 for cameras generate 3D image data which is used to identify items to be picked; see at least para. 47 for picking items from topmost trays in stacks);
control a robotic arm to perform a pick and place operation on the item with respect to the topmost receptacle in the stack of one or more stackable receptacles (see at least para. 47 for picking items from topmost trays in stacks using robot arm placing items on topmost trays in stacks being assembled in output stack work areas 320 and 322); and
continue successive iterations of identifying, picking, and placing items, until a stop condition is determined to have been met, the stop condition including one or more of determining no further items remain to be processed and determining that the stack of one or more stackable receptacles includes a maximum permitted number of stackable receptacles (see at least para. 48 for as trays are emptied the empty trays are placed in output work areas 320 and 322 by robots, which implies that that the robot picks items from the tray and stops picking items from said tray when it is empty).
Re claim 2, Sun further discloses wherein the stackable receptacles are pallets (see at least para. 46 wherein stacks comprising of one or more pallets).
Re claim 8, Sun further discloses wherein the item comprises a first item, the stack of one or more stackable receptacles comprises a first stack of one or more stackable receptacles at a first location adjacent to the robotic arm, and the processor is further configured to: use the image data to identify a second item associated with a topmost receptacle in a second stack of one or more stackable receptacles at a second location adjacent to the robotic arm; and control a robotic arm to perform a pick and place operation on the second item with respect to the topmost receptacle in the second stack of one or more stackable receptacles (see at least Fig. 3 and para. 49 for stacks along a central path defined by guides or tracks 314 and 316 contain a single product whereas the stacks in output stack work areas 320 and 322 contain mixed products, which implies that the robot would need to identify and pick objects from different stacks).
Re claim 14, Sun further discloses a camera configured to generate the image data (see at least para. 31 for cameras generate 3D image data).
Re claim 15, Sun further discloses wherein the camera comprises a 3D camera (see at least para. 31 for cameras generate 3D image data).
Re claim 16, Sun further discloses wherein the processor is configured to provide a computer vision module configured to use the image data to generate a three dimensional view of a workspace in which the robotic arm, the item, and the stack of one or more receptacles are located (see at least para. 31 for cameras generate 3D view of the work area).
Re claim 18, Sun discloses wherein the processor is further configured to verify that the item is not a stackable receptacle (see at least para. 32 for comparing image and/or other sensor data to item model data stored in a library to identify an item).
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.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun (US 2021/0122046) in view of Creusot (US 2023/0294295).
Re claim 9, Sun is silent regarding, but Creusot (US 2023/0294295) teaches wherein the processor is configured to perform pick and place tasks successively with respect to items associated with the first stack of one or more stackable receptacles until the stop condition is determined to be met with respect to the first stack of one or more stackable receptacles, and turn to performing pick and place tasks successively with respect to items associated with the second stack of one or more stackable receptacles based at least in part on the determination that the stop condition has been met with respect to the first stack of one or more stackable receptacles (see at least para. 31 for transitioning to picking from a second or redundant bin in response to determination that the first bin is empty).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Sun with the features of Creusot because it can minimize downtown of the robotic assembly system in high-throughput applications by having a redundant container of objects for when a first container is picked empty.
Claim(s) 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun (US 2021/0122046) in view of Creusot (US 2023/0294295) in view of Lert (US 2020/0039746).
Re claim 10, modified Sun is silent regarding, however, Lert teaches wherein the processor is further configured to cause the stop condition to be cleared with respect to the first stack of one or more stackable receptacles, while items are being picked and placed with respect to the second stack of one or more stackable receptacles (see at least para. 53 for replacing an empty pallet with a full pallet while the second pallet is being processed; the claim does not define what clearing the stop condition means therefore the claim limitation has been met as it would have been obvious that when the second pallet is empty the full pallet would be processed).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of modified Sun with the features of Lert to maintain efficiency by always providing a supply of pallets to be processed by replacing empty pallets with full pallets for processing.
Re claim 11, Lert further teaches wherein the stop condition is cleared with respect to the first stack of one or more stackable receptacles, at least in part, by removing the first stack of one or more stackable receptacles (see at least para. 53 for replacing an empty pallet with a full pallet while the second pallet is being processed; the claim does not define what clearing the stop condition means therefore the claim limitation has been met as it would have been obvious that when the second pallet is empty the full pallet would be processed)
Re claim 12, Lert further teaches wherein the stop condition is cleared with respect to the first stack of one or more stackable receptacles, at least in part, by replacing the first stack of one or more stackable receptacles with a full receptacle (see at least para. 53 for replacing an empty pallet with a full pallet while the second pallet is being processed; the claim does not define what clearing the stop condition means therefore the claim limitation has been met as it would have been obvious that when the second pallet is empty the full pallet would be processed)
Claim(s) 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun (US 2021/0122046) in view of Fusy (WO2017091128A1).
Re claim 17, Sun is silent regarding but Fusy (WO2017091128A1) teaches wherein the stop condition includes a determination that the topmost receptacle is full and the processor is further configured to cause the topmost receptacle to be removed from the stack of one or more stackable receptacles (see at least pg. 6 for when the first pallet is fully loaded then the first pallet is removed).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of modified Sun with the features of Fusy to maintain efficiency by always providing a supply of pallets to be filled by replacing full pallets with empty pallets for processing while another pallet is being filled.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-7 and 13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including al l of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art does not teach, neither alone nor in combination, the combination of limitations of the claimed invention. For example, US 11,459,221 is directed towards stacking pallets and US 2022/0297958 is directed towards determine stack height but do not teach the limitations as claimed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-4838. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8AM - 4PM 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, ANITA COUPE can be reached at (571) 270-3614. 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.
/ROBERT T NGUYEN/PRIMARY EXAMINER, Art Unit 3619
Prosecution Insights