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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 25 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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)(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, 4-6, 8-10, 12-15, 19-20, 23-25, and 28-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Buchmann U.S. Patent No. 8,397,898.
Claim 1, Buchmann teaches a station Fig. 2 for managing the load of transport units 42 of a conveyor system 10, comprising: a first conveyor 51 and a second conveyor 56 with a plurality of transport units 42; at least one first transfer station 32, arranged for receiving units of goods A1,A2, A3, wherein the at least one first transfer station 32 has a third conveyor 134 for conveying units of goods A1,A2, A3; a retrieval station 50 for retrieving units of goods A1,A2, A3 from a transport unit 42 of the first conveyor 51 and for transferring the retrieved units of goods A1,A2, A3 to the first transfer station 32; a second transfer station 38 for transferring units of goods A1,A2, A3 from the first transfer station 32 to a transport unit 42 of the second conveyor 56, and a joint conveyor system 30 which functionally connects the first conveyor 51 and the second conveyor 56, wherein the first conveyor 51 and the second conveyor 56are part of the joint conveyor system 130 Figs. 2,8 C9 L55-67; C10 L1-10.
Claim 4, Buchmann teaches the first transfer station 32 comprises at least one actuator (drive system to move conveyor) for the selective movement of individual units of goods A1,A2,A3.
Claim 5, Buchmann teaches the transport units 42 can be conveyed on the second conveyor 56 along a conveyor route of 56, in particular along a conveying path of 56.
Claim 6, Buchmann teaches the first conveyor 51 and/or the second conveyor 56 comprises at least one of a belt conveyor, tray conveyor, tilting tray conveyor, plate chain conveyor, modular belt conveyor, cam chain conveyor, cross-belt conveyor, an overhead conveyor system, a rail-guided conveyor system and a conveyor chain system, with which transport units can be transported suspended along a conveyor route, or a conveying path, respectively Fig. 2.
Claim 8, Buchmann teaches the first conveyor 51 and/or the second conveyor 56 comprises an actively driven conveyor device Figs. 2.
Claim 9, Buchmann teaches the third conveyor 30 comprises a device for horizontally conveying units of goods A1,A2,A3 including at least one of a belt conveyor, tray conveyor, tilting tray conveyor, plate chain conveyor, modular belt conveyor, cross belt conveyor, vibration conveyor, cam chain conveyor, drop flap conveyor and a carousel conveyor Fig. 2.
Claim 10, Buchmann teaches the second transfer station 38 comprises a device 38 for diverting units of goods A1,A2,A3 on the horizontal conveying device of the third conveyor 30.
Claim 12, Buchmann teaches the second transfer station 38 comprises one or more transfer points Fig. 2.
Claim 13, Buchmann teaches a device of 38 adapted to sort and/or group and/or separate units of goods in the first transfer station 32.
Claim 14, Buchmann teaches the load management station VS comprises at least one or more further conveying devices 34,88, passive conveying devices, chutes, and drop chutes Fig. 1 C10 L1-10.
Claim 15, Buchmann teaches a detection device 82 for determining the position of units of goods A1,A2,A3 in the transfer station 32 C10 L53-65.
Claim 19, Buchmann teaches the first transfer station 32 comprises a device 22,50,88 for intermediate storage of units of goods A1,A2,A3.
Claim 20, Buchmann teaches at least one drop-off station 34 for temporarily receiving and providing a group of units of goods for subsequent use, for example the packaging of the group of units of goods A1,A2,A3 in a container 42.
Claims 23 and 24, Buchmann teaches a conveyor system comprising a load management station according to claim 1 Abstract.
Claim 25, Buchmann teaches a method for managing the loading of transport units 42 of a conveyor system Fig. 8, comprising the steps of: retrieving at least one unit of goods 2A1,A2,A3 from at least one transport unit 42 of a first conveyor 51; transferring the retrieved at least one unit of goods A1,A2,A3 to a first transfer station 32, which comprises a third conveyor 30; conveying at least one unit of goods A1,A2,A3 in the first transfer station 32 with the third conveyor 30 along a conveying path of 22 Fig. 2; and transferring at least one unit of goods A1,A2,A3 from said first transfer station 32 to at least one transport unit of a second conveyor 56, wherein the first conveyor 51 and the second conveyor 56 are functionally connected by a conveyor system Fig 8, wherein the first conveyor 51 and the second conveyor 56 are part of the joint conveyor system Fig. 8.
Claim 28, Buchmann teaches a subset of the units of goods A1,A2,A3 is retrieved from the transfer station 32 and is not transferred to a transport unit of the second conveyor 56.
Claim 29, Buchmann teaches a group of units of goodsA1,A2,A3 is transferred to a transport unit 42 of the second conveyor 56.
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) 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buchmann U.S. Patent No. 8,397,898 in view of Mathi U.S. Patent No. 11,186,437.
Claim 16, Buchmann does not teach as Mathi teaches an identification device 23 for determining the identity of units of goods 2,3 in the transfer station 4,6 C7 L5-20. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to combine the transport disclosed in Buchmann with the control configuration taught in Mathi with a reasonable expectation of success because
Claim 17, Buchmann does not teach as Mathi teaches a marking device 23 for marking the position of units of goods 2,3 in the transfer station 4,6 C7 L5-20. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to combine the transport disclosed in Buchmann with the control configuration taught in Mathi with a reasonable expectation of success because
Claim 18, Buchmann does not teach as Mathi teaches a weighing device 28 for determining the weight of one or more units of goods 2,3 C7 L49-55. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to combine the transport disclosed in Buchmann with the control configuration taught in Mathi with a reasonable expectation of success because
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 7,11, 21-22, and 27 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.
Conclusion
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 KAVEL SINGH whose telephone number is (571)272-2362. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8am-6pm.
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, Gene Crawford can be reached at (571) 272-6911. 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.
/KAVEL SINGH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3651
KS
Prosecution Insights