DETAILED ACTION
The Amendment filed 8/11/2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 8-11, 13 and 18-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Fjeldheim (US 2023/0166913).
Regarding independent claim 1, Fjeldheim discloses a computer-implemented method for assisting the controlling of movement of one or more transport devices operating in a workspace, the method comprising: obtaining an image representation of the workspace captured by one or more image sensors (see at least paras. 0048, 0072 and 0077); obtaining, at an interface, a target image portion of the image representation of the workspace (see at least paras. 0049 and 0077) from an object detection system configured to detect faulty transport devices in the workspace based on image data representative of the workspace (see at least para. 0049), wherein the target image portion comprises at least part of a faulty transport device in the workspace (see at least para. 0049); determining, using an object classification model, that the faulty transport device is present in the image data (see at least paras. 0049 and 0076); mapping the target image portion to a target location in the workspace (see at least paras. 0074-0075); determining, based on the mapping, an exclusion zone in the workspace, comprising the target location, in which the one or more transport devices are to be prohibited from entering (see at least paras. 0030, 0051, and 0076); and outputting to a control system exclusion zone data, representative of the exclusion zone, for implementing the exclusion zone in the workspace (see at least para. 0051).
Regarding independent claim 13, Fjeldheim discloses an assistance system to assist a control system for controlling transport device movement in a workspace, the assistance system comprising: an image sensor (see at least paras. 0048, 0072 and 0077) to capture an image representation of the workspace; an object detection system configured to detect faulty transport devices in the workspace based on image data representative of the workspace (see at least para. 0049); an interface (see at least paras. 0049 and 0077) to obtain a target image portion of the image representation of the workspace from the object detection system, wherein the target image portion comprises at least part of the faulty transport device detected in the workspace (see at least para. 0049); wherein the assistance system is configured to: determine, using an object classification model, that the faulty transport device is present in the image data (see at least paras. 0049 and 0076); map the target image portion to a target location in the workspace (see at least paras. 0074-0075); determine, based on the mapping, an exclusion zone in the workspace, comprising the target location in which one or more transport devices are prohibited from entering (see at least paras. 0030, 0051, and 0076); and output to the control system exclusion zone data, representative of the exclusion zone, for implementing the exclusion zone in the workspace (see at least para. 0051).
Regarding independent claim 18, Fjeldheim discloses A storage system, comprising: a workspace (see at least Fig. 4); a control system (500) for controlling transport device movement in the workspace; and an assistance system, comprising: an image sensor (see at least paras. 0048, 0072 and 0077) to capture an image representation of the workspace; an object detection system configured to detect faulty transport devices in the workspace based on image data representative of the workspace (see at least para. 0049); an interface (see at least paras. 0049 and 0077) to obtain a target image portion of the image representation of the workspace from the object detection system, wherein the target image portion comprises at least part of the faulty transport device detected in the workspace (see at least para. 0049); wherein the assistance system is configured to: determine, using an object classification model, that the faulty transport device is present in the image data (see at least paras. 0049 and 0076); map the target image portion to a target location in the workspace (see at least paras. 0074-0075); determine, based on the mapping, an exclusion zone in the workspace, comprising the target location, in which one or more transport devices are prohibited from entering (see at least paras. 0030, 0051, and 0076); and output to the control system exclusion zone data, representative of the exclusion zone, for implementing the exclusion zone in the workspace (see at least para. 0051); wherein the workspace comprises a grid formed by a first set of parallel tracks extending an X-direction, and a second set of parallel tracks extending in a Y-direction transverse to the first set in a substantially horizontal plane, the grid comprising a plurality of grid spaces, wherein the one or more transport devices are arranged to selectively move in at least one of the X-direction or Y-direction on the tracks and to handle a container stacked beneath the tracks within a footprint of a single grid space (see at least Figs. 1 and 7).
Regarding dependent claims 4, 8-11, and 19-21, Fjeldheim discloses that the workspace comprises a grid of cells, the one or more transport devices arranged to move between the cells on the grid, wherein the target image portion comprises a given cell in the grid of cells (see at least Fig. 9). The workspace comprises a grid formed by a first set of parallel tracks extending in an X- direction, and a second set of parallel tracks extending in a Y-direction transverse to the first set a substantially horizontal plane, the grid comprising a plurality of grid spaces; the one or more transport devices being arranged to selectively move in at least one of the X-direction or Y-direction on the tracks and to handle a container stacked beneath the tracks within a footprint of a single grid space (see at least Figs. 1 and 7). The one or more transport devices each has a footprint that occupies only a single grid space, such that a given transport device occupying one grid space does not obstruct another transport device occupying or traversing adjacent grid spaces (see at least Figs. 1 and 7). The exclusion zone comprises a discrete number of grid spaces (see at least Fig. 9). Fjeldheim further discloses implementing the exclusion zone at the control system such that the one or more transport devices are prohibited from entering the exclusion zone (see at least para. 0030).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fjeldheim (US 2023/0166913) in view of Yankun et al. (US 8,848,978). Fjeldheim discloses a computer-implemented method for assisting the controlling of movement of one or more transport devices operating in a workspace, the method comprising: obtaining an image representation of the workspace captured by one or more image sensors (see at least paras. 0048, 0072 and 0077); obtaining, at an interface, a target image portion of the image representation of the workspace (see at least paras. 0049 and 0077) from an object detection system configured to detect faulty transport devices in the workspace based on image data representative of the workspace (see at least para. 0049), wherein the target image portion comprises at least part of a faulty transport device in the workspace (see at least para. 0049); determining, using an object classification model, that the faulty transport device is present in the image data (see at least paras. 0049 and 0076); mapping the target image portion to a target location in the workspace (see at least paras. 0074-0075); determining, based on the mapping, an exclusion zone in the workspace, comprising the target location, in which the one or more transport devices are to be prohibited from entering (see at least paras. 0030, 0051, and 0076); and outputting to a control system exclusion zone data, representative of the exclusion zone, for implementing the exclusion zone in the workspace (see at least para. 0051). Fjeldheim discloses all the limitations of the claims, but it does not disclose that the mapping comprises inversing a distortion of the image representation of the workspace. However, Yankun discloses a similar method which includes mapping an area by inversing a distortion of the image representation of the workspace (see col. 6, lines 43-55) for the purpose of improving the ability of the system to detect obstacles. It would have been for a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention to have the mapping include mapping an area by inversing a distortion of the image representation of the workspace, as disclosed by Yankun, for the purpose of improving the ability of the system to detect obstacles
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/11/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant states that Fjeldheim does not disclose an object detection system that detects faulty transport devices based on image data. The examiner disagrees with the applicant. At least in paragraphs 0049 and 0076, Fjeldheim discloses an object detection system that detects faulty transport devices based on image data. Even though Fjeldheim discloses that the approximate location is known before a camera-equipped drone is dispatched, Fjeldheim discloses this limitation because the precise location of a faulty transport device is detected based on image data from the drone.
The applicant states that Fjeldheim does not disclose determining, using an object classification model, that a faulty transport device is present in the image data. The examiner disagrees with the applicant. At least in paragraphs 0049 and 0076, Fjeldheim discloses using an object classification model, that a faulty transport device is present in the image data. Fjeldheim specifically states that the drone precisely, visually locates the faulty transport device.
In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness of claim 12 is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971). In this instance, Fjeldheim discloses all the limitations of the claims, but it does not disclose that the mapping comprises inversing a distortion of the image representation of the workspace. However, Yankun discloses a similar method which includes mapping an area by inversing a distortion of the image representation of the workspace (see col. 6, lines 43-55) for the purpose of improving the ability of the system to detect obstacles. It would have been for a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention to have the mapping include mapping an area by inversing a distortion of the image representation of the workspace, as disclosed by Yankun, for the purpose of improving the ability of the system to detect obstacles.
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 PATRICK HEWEY MACKEY whose telephone number is (571)272-6916. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 9-5.
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, Michael McCullough can be reached at 571-272-7805. 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.
/PATRICK H MACKEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3653
Prosecution Insights