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 .
Claims 16-35 are pending.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on May 13, 2024 has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 17, 18, 28 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
In claims 17 and 28 the term “in some other way” is used, it is unclear as to what is being claimed as this limitation is limitless in that any action is claimed which makes the claim unclear and indefinite. Correction is required.
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.
Claims 16, 20-22, 26, 27, 31, 32, 34 and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over European Patent No. EP3301624 to Mueck et al. in view of U.S. Patent No. 4,798,278 to Cornacchia (A machine translation of the foreign document is enclosed with this action and referred to herein).
Regarding claims 16 and 26, the Mueck patent teaches a method for locating and manipulating an identifier that is fastened to an item and has a unique machine-readable identity, which comprises the following method steps of:a) transporting 20 the item to a reading apparatus 14; locating and reading out the identifier 10 of the item using the reading apparatus; further handling of the item according to sorting information determined by a readout identifier. See pages 6 and 7 of the translation.
However, the Mueck patent lacks a specific teaching of mechanically manipulating the item using a manipulation apparatus if the identifier is not located successfully; and mechanically manipulating the identifier using the manipulation apparatus independently of moving the item as a whole.
The Cornacchia patent teaches a mechanically manipulating the item using a manipulation apparatus 17 if the identifier is not located successfully; and mechanically manipulating the item using the manipulation apparatus independently of moving the item as a whole. See Fig. 3 and column 6, lines 3-14.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the subject invention to modify the Mueck patent to have the manipulation apparatus as taught by the Cornacchia patent as it would have been combining known prior art elements using known methods to provide the predictable result of being able to orient the packages or luggage as needed in order to read labels or tags.
Regarding claims 20 and 31, the manipulation apparatus manipulates the identifier and/or the item by gripping movements. The term gripping movement as broadly recited in the claims is interpreted as the item does not move. See Fig. 3 of Cornacchia.
Regarding claims 21 and 32, detecting, via a detection apparatus 84, a section of the manipulation apparatus that is manipulating the identifier and/or the item. See Fig. 3 of Cornacchia.
Regarding claims 22 and 35, the detection apparatus follows a movement of the manipulation apparatus. See Fig. 3 of Cornacchia.
Regarding claim 27, manipulation apparatus is configured so as to mechanically manipulate the item in order to locate the identifier. See Fig. 3 of Cornacchia.
Regarding claim 34, said manipulation apparatus has at least two robotic arms. The term robotic arm as broadly recited in the claim is interpreted as parts 62 in Fig. 3 of Cornacchia.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 19, 23-25, 30 and 33 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.
Claims 17, 18, 28 and 29 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Publication No. 2021/0283780 to Kilibarda et al. teaches a robot end effector for packages.
U.S. Publication No. 2017/0349385 to Moroni et al. teaches tags for packages for sorting.
European Patent No. WO2019/207208 to Tuominen et al. that teaches manipulating a package for movement.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN HOLMES whose telephone number is (571)272-3448. The examiner can normally be reached 10AM-6PM EST M-F.
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, Jacob S Scott can be reached at 571-270-3415. 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.
/JUSTIN HOLMES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3655
Prosecution Insights