CTNF 18/678,014 CTNF 91490 DETAILED ACTION Claims 1-16 are considered in this office action. Claims 1-16 are pending examination. Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-12-aia AIA (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. 07-15-03-aia AIA Claim s 1-2, 4-5 and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Hutsler et al. (US12090954B2) and herein after will be referred as Hutsler . Regarding Claim 1, Hutsler teaches an apparatus comprising: a memory configured to store instructions; and a processor configured, by executing the instructions, to (Col.4 Line 63-Col.5 Line 21: “Embodiments of systems and devices described herein can include one or more machine-executable components or instructions embodied within one or more machines (e.g., embodied in one or more computer-readable storage media associated with one or more machines). Such components, when executed by the one or more machines (e.g., processors, computers, computing devices, virtual machines, etc.) can cause the one or more machines to perform the operations described. These computer/machine executable components or instructions (and other described herein) can be stored in memory associated with the one or more machines. The memory can further be operatively coupled to at least one processor, such that the components can be executed by the at least one processor to perform the operations described. In some embodiments, the memory can include anon-transitory machine-readable medium, comprising the executable components or instructions that, when executed by a processor, facilitate performance of operations described for the respective executable components. Examples of said and memory and processor as well as other suitable computer or computing-based elements, can be found with reference to FIG. 10 (e.g., processing unit 1004 and system memory 1006 respectively), and can be used in connection with implementing one or more of the systems or components shown and described in connection with FIG. 1 , or other figures disclosed herein.”): receive order information from a user terminal (Fig.2 #203 Col. 12 Line 26-29: “At 203 , the ordering system 102 can receive an order for a product provided by the merchant corresponding to pick-up location 110 and a delivery service request for the product to be delivered to the drop-off location 114 .”); provide details of an ordered object included in the order information to a provider of the ordered object (Fig.2 #206 Col. 13 Line 10-16: “At 206 , the autonomous vehicle 118 can pick-up the product or products associated with the order from the pick-up location 110 based on arrival at the pick-up location and successful verification that the current location of the vehicle corresponds to the pick-up location using the authentication/verification information and/or associated protocol required for the pick-up location. In some embodiments, based on successful verification of the pick-up, the vehicle computing system 120 can notify an entity at the pick-up location (e.g., via a corresponding device associated with the entity) that the vehicle has arrived for the pick-up of a particular product or order number and include the product and/or order number in the notification.”); recognize the ordered object provided from the provider (Fig.2 #207 Col.13 Line 29-34: “In association with verifying the pick-up and reception of the product, at 207 , the vehicle computing system 120 can report the valid pick-up to the autonomous vehicle service management system 104 which in turn can report the valid pick-up to the ordering system 102 at 208 . The vehicle can further navigate to the drop-off location 114 to perform the drop-off of the product.”); and control at least one of a seat, a window, a door, or a trunk of a vehicle based on a position of a loading target space for the ordered object in the vehicle (Col 13 Line 18-28: “Based on reception of the notification, the entity can proceed to place the product or products associated with the order on or within the vehicle. In some embodiments, the vehicle computing system 120 can open the vehicle for the placement of the product therein in response to successful verification. In some aspects, the product can be placed anywhere inside the vehicle. In other aspects, the autonomous vehicle 118 can include a plurality of locker units and the vehicle computing system 120 can assign the order a locker unit for placing the product and provide access only to the corresponding locker unit.” and also See Col.4 Line 8-17: “Based on a result of the verifying being that the current location of the autonomous vehicle corresponds to the target physical location, the operations can further comprise enabling physical access to an area that is part of the autonomous vehicle for placement of the product in connection with the pick-up of the product. For example, the physical area may include any internal compartment of the vehicle, a designated area of the vehicle, a specific locker unit or compartment of the vehicle to which the only the parties involved in the order are given access, or the like.”). Similarly Claim 12 is rejected on the similar rational. Regarding Claim 2, Hutsler teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Hutsler also teaches wherein the order information includes at least one of orderer information related to the order information, the details of the ordered object, delivery date and time of the ordered object, a location information of a store, or information on the provider (Col.13 Line 10-16: “In some embodiments, based on successful verification of the pick-up, the vehicle computing system 120 can notify an entity at the pick-up location (e.g., via a corresponding device associated with the entity) that the vehicle has arrived for the pick-up of a particular product or order number and include the product and/or order number in the notification.”). Similarly Claim 13 is rejected on the similar rational. Regarding Claim 4, Hutsler teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Hutsler also teaches wherein the processor is further configured, by executing the instructions, to: recognize identification information related to the provider using a sensor (Col.12 Line 1-20); and provide the details of the ordered object to the provider (Col.13 Line 10-16). Similarly Claim 14 is rejected on the similar rational. Regarding Claim 5, Hutsler teaches the apparatus of claim 4. Hutsler also teaches wherein the processor is further configured, by executing the instructions, to: provide the details of the ordered object to the provider in case that the identification information related to the provider recognized using the sensor matches to the identification information of the provider included in the order information (Col.12 Line 1-20 and also see Col.13 Line 10-16) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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 of this title, 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. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co. , 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hutsler in view of Losh et al. (US20240308336A1) and herein after will be referred as Losh respectively . Regarding Claim 3, Hutsler teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Hutsler also teaches wherein the processor is further configured, by executing the instructions, to: provide the details of the ordered object to the provider using at least one of a display device or a speaker in the vehicle (Col. 13 Line 10-18: “In some embodiments, based on successful verification of the pick-up, the vehicle computing system 120 can notify an entity at the pick-up location (e.g., via a corresponding device associated with the entity) that the vehicle has arrived for the pick-up of a particular product or order number and include the product and/or order number in the notification. The entity may correspond to a user (i.e., a person at the store), a machine (e.g., a robot) or the like. Based on reception of the notification, the entity can proceed to place the product or products associated with the order on or within the vehicle.”). Even though Hutsler does not specifically teaches about display device or the speaker, however it is very common for an autonomous vehicle to utilize the display device or the speakers of the vehicle to communicate with the robot/ machine/ person at the store (external interface) during the pickup process. Just avoid possible arguments from the applicant, the examiner is presenting prior art Losh et al. (US20240308336A1) to disclose the display device to interact with the external interface ( Para [0012] : “According to another aspect, when performing an interaction with the external interface the controller is adapted to at least one of display, with the video display, an image of identification credentials to the external interface, display, with the video display, an image of at least one of an authentication card, bar code, and QR code for payments, and initiate a vehicle event such as door unlocking, door opening, window lowering, and trunk hatch opening.”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hutsler to incorporate the teachings of Losh to include display device to communicate with external interface. Doing so would optimize pickup and delivery process . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hutsler in view of Gillen et al. (US10,614,410) and herein after will be referred as Gillen. Regarding Claim 6, Hutsler teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Hutsler may not expressly teaches wherein the processor is further configured, by executing the instructions, to: recognize the ordered object by a recognition code related to the ordered object. Gillen teaches the processor is further configured, by executing the instructions, to: recognize the ordered object by a recognition code related to the ordered object (Col.15 Line 2-12: “In one embodiment, each item may include an item/shipment identifier, such as a barcode, a MaxiCode, electronic representation, and/or text. The item/shipment identifier (e.g., 123456789) may be used by the carrier to identify and track the item as it moves through the carrier's transportation network. Such item/shipment identifiers can be affixed to items by, for example, using a sticker (e.g., label) with the item/shipment identifier printed thereon (in human and/or machine readable form), an RFID tag with the item/shipment identifier stored therein or an electronic tag with a display screen”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hutsler to incorporate the teachings of Gillen to include recognize the ordered object by a recognition code related to the ordered object. Doing so would optimize the verification of the ordered object . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hutsler in view of Stefan (WO 2015176785A1)) and herein after will be referred as Stefan . Regarding Claim 7, Hutsler teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Hutsler may not expressly teaches wherein the processor is further configured, by executing the instructions, to: control lighting of a seat in the vehicle according to a position of the loading target space for the ordered object. Stefan control lighting of a seat in the vehicle according to a position of the loading target space for the ordered object (Para [0035]: “Furthermore, the present invention relates to a method for illuminating an object arranged on at least one seat in a vehicle by means of at least one lighting arranged in the at least one seat, wherein the lighting is controlled in such a way that the object is selectively illuminated at a specific, pre-provided location.”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hutsler to incorporate the teachings of Stefan to include control lighting of a seat in the vehicle according to a position of the loading target space for the ordered object. Doing so would optimize the placement of the ordered object in the vehicle . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 8 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hutsler in view of Stefan and in further view of Kusu et al. (US20090129105A1) and herein after will be referred as Kusu . Regarding Claim 8, Hutsler in view of Stefan teaches the apparatus of claim 7. Stefan teaches wherein the processor is further configured, by executing the instructions, to: control to turn on the lighting that emits light to a loading target seat for the ordered object (Para [0035]. Hutsler and Stefan does not expressly teaches turn off the lighting that illuminates other seats in the vehicle. Kusu teaches turn off the lighting that illuminates other seats in the vehicle (Fig12 #2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hutsler and Stefan to incorporate the teachings of Kusu to include turn off the lighting that illuminates other seats in the vehicle. Doing so would optimize the placement of the ordered object in the vehicle. Similarly Claim 15 is rejected on the similar rational . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 9-11 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hutsler in view of Kim et al. (US 11 142 095 B2) and herein after will be referred as Kim . Regarding Claim 9, Hutsler teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Hutsler may not expressly teaches wherein the processor is further configured, by executing the instructions, to: control to swivel at least one seat in the vehicle based on which seat is a loading target seat in the vehicle for the ordered object. Kim teaches control to swivel at least one seat in the vehicle based on which seat is a loading target seat in the vehicle for the ordered object (Col. 2 Line 9-16: “The motion calculator may set a space in the vehicle where an object is to be positioned in accordance with the information of the object. When an object is to be positioned on a seat, the motion calculator may match a seat in accordance with information of the object, and calculates a type and degree of motion of the matched seat.”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hutsler to incorporate the teachings of Kim to include control to swivel at least one seat in the vehicle based on which seat is a loading target seat in the vehicle for the ordered object. Doing so would optimize the placement of the ordered object in the vehicle. Similarly Claim 16 is rejected on the similar rational. Regarding Claim 10, Hutsler in view of Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 9. Kim teaches wherein the processor is further configured, by executing the instructions, to: control to swivel other seats to adjust an arrangement of the other seats, in case that other items are loaded on seats in the vehicle other than the loading target seat (Col.4 Line 56-67: “The motion calculator 300 can set a space in the vehicle where objects are loaded in accordance with the information of objects. This is because a trunk would be enough for relatively small objects, but it may be necessary to fold the seats in the third row and then load objects in the trunk and the third row when objects are relatively large. Accordingly, when an object has to be loaded on a seat, the motion calculator 300 can match a seat in accordance with the information of the object and calculate the type and degree of motion of the matched seat. That is, it may be possible to expand the trunk by folding the matched seat and secure an additional space by sliding other surrounding seats”). Regarding Claim 11, Hutsler in view of Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 10. Kim teaches wherein the order information includes information on whether objects are loaded for each seat in the vehicle (Col.5 Line 1-14: “The information of an object may include the size of the object. It is possible to express the size of an object using an X-axis, a Y-axis, and a Z-axis, and a space is calculated and seats are controlled based on the entire 3D-size of an object. To this end, a user may have to input the size of each object. In detail, when there is a plurality of objects, the motion calculator 300 may match seats where the objects are required to be loaded in consideration of the whole size of the objects and the information of passengers and calculate the types and degrees of motions of the matched seats and surrounding seats. When there are a plurality of objects, the motion calculator may calculate the loading positions and order of the objects on the basis of the object having the largest long side of the long sides of the objects.”) . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Patel et al. (US10592851B1) discloses systems and methods for delivering a requested payload using an autonomous delivery vehicle are described herein. In some embodiments, a cargo system for use with an autonomous delivery vehicle can include a frame defining a cargo space having an opening. A plurality of partitions can be positioned within the cargo space and configured to divide the cargo space into compartments. In some embodiments, the partitions are movable so that the cargo space can be divided into efficiently-sized compartments based on, for example, size characteristics of the payload. The cargo system can further include an access system configured to selectively define an aperture over the opening of the cargo space. The access system can vary the size and position of the aperture to provide access to only a selected one of the compartments regardless of the size and/or position of the selected compartment. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABDHESH K JHA whose telephone number is (571)272-6218. The examiner can normally be reached M-F:0800-1700. 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, James J Lee can be reached at 571-270-5965. 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. /ABDHESH K JHA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668 Application/Control Number: 18/678,014 Page 2 Art Unit: 3668 Application/Control Number: 18/678,014 Page 3 Art Unit: 3668 Application/Control Number: 18/678,014 Page 4 Art Unit: 3668 Application/Control Number: 18/678,014 Page 5 Art Unit: 3668 Application/Control Number: 18/678,014 Page 6 Art Unit: 3668 Application/Control Number: 18/678,014 Page 7 Art Unit: 3668 Application/Control Number: 18/678,014 Page 8 Art Unit: 3668 Application/Control Number: 18/678,014 Page 9 Art Unit: 3668 Application/Control Number: 18/678,014 Page 10 Art Unit: 3668 Application/Control Number: 18/678,014 Page 11 Art Unit: 3668 Application/Control Number: 18/678,014 Page 12 Art Unit: 3668 Application/Control Number: 18/678,014 Page 13 Art Unit: 3668
Prosecution Insights