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 .
________________________________________
References Used
Reference 1 (Primary) - WO 2024/015500 A1.
Reference 2 - US 2016/0075512 A1.
Reference 3 - US 2020/0283229 A1.
Reference 4 - US 2020/0361711 A1.
Reference 5 - US 10,207,804 B1.
Reference 6 - US 2024/0157851 A1.
Reference 7 - US 2017/0136881 A1.
Reference 8 - US 2019/0272760 A1.
Reference 9 - US 2003/0037009 A1.
Reference 10 - US 2018/0203462 A1.
Reference 11 - US 5,439,645.
________________________________________
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were effectively filed absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was effectively filed in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1.
Claim Text
(L1) A system comprising a delivery pod configured to traverse a pipe network, the delivery pod comprising: a set of wheel assemblies positioned to enable contact with a guide rail extending through a hollow interior of one or more pipe segments of the pipe network; (L2) a drive module comprising an electric motor operatively connected to a primary wheel assembly of the set of wheel assemblies; a power module comprising an electric power source electrically connected to the drive module; a cargo module comprising a removable tote; (L3) a wireless communication module configured to wirelessly scan navigation beacons as the pod traverses the pipe network and to transmit, to a junction of the pipe network, a signal indicating a route of the pod, the signal causing a turntable of the junction to rotate the pod into alignment with an adjoining pipe segment of the pipe network; (L4) and a control module configured to: (i) record navigation data as the pod traverses the pipe network, and (ii) transmit the navigation data to a remote service to enable tracking of the pod through the pipe network.
Analysis
(L1) Reference 1 teaches a network of tubular conduit segments 10 having hollow interiors that enclose guide rails 11 and autonomous self-propelled carts 15 having wheel assemblies engaged with the rails (paragraphs 0055-0067, 0082-0085; Figures 2, 6A, 6B, and 9-16). The cart is a delivery pod because it carries a removable payload between loading and unloading nodes. (L2) Reference 1 teaches wheel motors 25, motor controllers 26, battery 27, control/telemetry module 20, and a removable item supported on fins 16 and transferred at node 7 (paragraphs 0056, 0068-0084). (L3) Reference 1 teaches navigation using radio or RFID beacons, route planning, communications between carts and transceivers at nodes or intersections, and a turntable-like apparatus at a T-junction that rotates a cart into a selected branch (paragraphs 0053 and 0088-0095). Reference 1 does not expressly state in one sentence that the cart's route signal actuates the turntable. Its disclosed route planner, cart-to-intersection communication, junction routing apparatus, and intersection controller nevertheless identify the cart route and command the disclosed turntable to the branch corresponding to that route. (L4) Reference 1 teaches collecting cart location, orientation, motion, payload, telemetry, and odometry data, processing route information onboard, and sending information through edge devices to a remote cloud optimization system that monitors and supplies updated routing intelligence (paragraphs 0086-0095).
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to configure Reference 1's cart to send its selected route to the intersection controller and to have that controller rotate Reference 1's turntable-like routing apparatus into the corresponding branch, because Reference 1 already determines the cart route, communicates directly with intersections, and uses the turntable to route the cart at the junction. The predictable result is automatic alignment of the cart with the selected adjoining tubular segment while retaining Reference 1's autonomous navigation and remote tracking architecture.
________________________________________
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of References 8 and 9.
Claim Text
(L1) The system of claim 1, wherein the control module is further configured to: determine an initial route through the pipe network for delivering the removable tote to a first destination portal; receive a notification, via an adjacent pod of the pipe network, indicating that an intended destination of the removable tote has been modified to a second destination portal, wherein the notification was broadcasted to the pod by an external service through a distributed network of pods including the adjacent pod; calculate an updated route through the pipe network for delivering the removable tote to the second destination portal; and navigate the pod through the updated route.
Analysis
(L1) The claim 1 analysis is incorporated. Reference 1 determines and updates cart routes from node destinations and remote network information, but it does not expressly disclose a changed tote destination broadcast by an external service through adjacent carts. Reference 8 teaches a source vehicle 202 broadcasting message 212 with rebroadcast instructions 216 through successive intermediate vehicles 204, 206, and 208 to recipient vehicle 210; each adjacent intermediate vehicle receives and rebroadcasts the message as relay messages 218, 222, and 226 (paragraphs 0036-0052; Figures 1-3). Reference 9 teaches remotely changing a package's current delivery location 109 to alternate delivery location 111 and transmitting the package identifier and new location to distribution network 107 so the package is redirected (paragraphs 0018-0035; Figures 1-3). Using Reference 8's vehicle-hop relay to carry Reference 9's destination-change notification to Reference 1's cart supplies receipt via an adjacent pod, after which Reference 1's route planner calculates and follows the route to the new node.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to distribute Reference 9's package-destination update through Reference 8's adjacent-vehicle rebroadcast chain to Reference 1's destination-routed cart, because Reference 1 contemplates underground or remote tubular branches and distributed cart communications, while Reference 8 expressly uses nearby vehicles to bridge a communication gap. The predictable result is delivery of a late destination change to a cart beyond direct service range and recalculation of its known route to the changed destination.
________________________________________
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1.
Claim Text
(L1) The system of claim 1, wherein navigation beacons are configured for one-way communication of location information to the pod, and wherein the wireless communication module is further configured for two-way communication with a set of junction terminals of the pipe network.
Analysis
(L1) The claim 1 analysis is incorporated. Reference 1 teaches fixed radio, RFID, GPS, visual, and BLE beacons or identifiers that provide cart location references; it separately teaches wireless transceivers and processors at multiple nodes and intersections that exchange routing, status, and all-clear information with carts (paragraphs 0088-0095). A location beacon that broadcasts its identifier or position to passing carts performs the claimed one-way location communication, while the disclosed node/intersection transceivers are junction terminals used for two-way cart communications.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to configure Reference 1's fixed location beacons as one-way broadcasts and its node/intersection transceivers as two-way terminals, because a broadcast beacon supplies a simple stable position reference whereas bidirectional junction exchange is needed for route requests, status, and clearance. The predictable result is lower-complexity localization together with interactive junction control using the communication hardware Reference 1 already places at those locations.
________________________________________
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Claim Text
(L1) The system of claim 1, wherein the set of wheel assemblies comprises: the primary wheel assembly operatively connected to the drive module; and a passive secondary wheel assembly.
Analysis
(L1) The claim 1 analysis is incorporated. Reference 1 teaches motor-driven wheels 21/25 but does not expressly distinguish a passive secondary wheel assembly. Reference 2 teaches driven wheels that propel the vehicle on the horizontal track surface and separate non-driven guide wheels that keep the driven wheels centered in the track (paragraphs 0074 and 0115-0116). Using the driven wheels as the primary assembly and the non-driven guide wheels as the passive secondary assembly supplies the claimed arrangement.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add Reference 2's passive guide-wheel assembly to Reference 1's motor-driven wheel assembly, because separate passive wheels constrain and stabilize a rail vehicle without the weight, control complexity, and power demand of an additional drive. The predictable result is guided rail engagement while propulsion remains concentrated in the primary wheel assembly.
________________________________________
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Claim Text
(L1) The system of claim 3, wherein the primary wheel assembly comprises: a set of drive wheels configured to propel the pod forward by making contact with a drive wheel contact surface of the guide rail, wherein an axis of the set of drive wheels is horizontal relative to the pod; and a set of keep wheels configured to maintain lateral alignment with the guide rail by making contact with a keep wheel contact surface of the guide rail as the pod traverses the pipe network, wherein an axis of the set of keep wheels is vertical relative to the pod.
Analysis
(L1) The claim 3 analysis is incorporated. Reference 1's motor-driven wheels propel the cart along rails but does not expressly identify the claimed orthogonal axes. Reference 2 teaches drive wheels running on horizontal surfaces of the track and separate non-driven guide wheels engaging vertical track surfaces to prevent the drive wheels from veering laterally (paragraphs 0074 and 0115-0116). In that arrangement the drive-wheel axle is horizontal and the guide or keep-wheel axle is vertical relative to the vehicle, providing the claimed propulsion and lateral alignment surfaces.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use Reference 2's orthogonal drive and guide-wheel geometry on Reference 1's rail cart, because horizontal-axis wheels efficiently carry load and generate longitudinal traction while vertical-axis keep wheels react lateral forces against a side surface without interfering with propulsion. The predictable result is stable forward movement and maintained lateral alignment in the enclosed rail path.
________________________________________
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Claim Text
(L1) The system of claim 1, further comprising: a second pod configured to: establish a mechanical coupling with the pod, wherein the mechanical coupling is one selected from a group consisting of a rear tow coupling and a push coupling; and transport the pod to a maintenance portal location; and wherein the pod further comprises: a linkage assembly configured to enable the second pod to establish the mechanical coupling, wherein the pod is configured to enter a passive transport mode while the mechanical coupling is engaged.
Analysis
(L1) The claim 1 analysis is incorporated. Reference 1 discloses maintenance stations and autonomous carts but not the claimed recovery coupling. Reference 2 expressly teaches a Tow-Bot that couples to a failed R-Bot on a guideway and pulls or pushes it to the Bot Lift for removal from the system (paragraph 0061). The coupling that transmits the pulling or pushing load is a linkage assembly; selecting a rear tow connection or a push connection provides the recited alternatives, and the failed R-Bot is passively transported while that coupling is engaged.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to equip Reference 1's carts with Reference 2's push/tow recovery linkage and route the coupled pair to a maintenance node, because a disabled rail-bound cart cannot steer around obstacles or leave the guideway and Reference 2 provides an automated way to clear that obstruction. The predictable result is removal of a failed cart by a powered second cart while the failed cart remains in a passive mode.
________________________________________
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of References 3 and 4.
Claim Text
(L1) The system of claim 1, wherein the cargo module comprises a sensor element, and wherein the system further comprises: a set of cache locations each configured to store at least one removable tote; and a tote lift mechanism comprising a sensor configured to detect the sensor element to determine that the removable tote is in alignment for removal from the pod, wherein the tote lift mechanism includes functionality to: upon determining that the removable tote is in alignment for removal from the pod, engage and lift the removable tote by moving along a linear guide rail; and deposit the removable tote into a first cache location of the set of cache locations for storage.
Analysis
(L1) The claim 1 analysis is incorporated. Reference 1 detects payload presence and unloads an item at a node but does not expressly provide the claimed tote identifier, alignment-confirming lift sensor, linear lift rail, and cache. Reference 3 teaches tote identifier 1422, including RFID tag 1424 or label 1426, sensor devices that scan that element, controller alignment of cart 122 with induction station 808, and transfer of the identified tote into container storage 120 (paragraphs 0002-0004, 0069, 0084, 0089, and 0099-0100; Figures 1-4 and 9-14). Reference 4 teaches totes 100 stored at multiple shelf locations 403 and a loader 200 that lifts and transfers a tote on linear guide rails 407 and 302 using carriage 405, lift motor 411, and camera 416 (paragraphs 0034 and 0056-0069; Figures 4-13). Using Reference 3's tote identifier as the sensor element and a lift-mounted reader to confirm that the identified tote is at the transfer alignment before actuating Reference 4's linear-rail loader supplies the claimed sequence and deposits the tote at a selected storage shelf or cache.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add Reference 3's identifier-based tote verification and alignment control and Reference 4's linear-rail loader and storage shelves to Reference 1's automated unloading node, because tote identity and alignment should be confirmed before an unattended lift engages the tote, and the linear-rail loader provides known controlled transfer to dense temporary storage. The predictable result is correct, aligned tote removal from the cart and placement into a selected cache with reduced risk of a wrong-tote transfer or mechanical misengagement.
________________________________________
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 5.
Claim Text
(L1) The system of claim 1, wherein the cargo module further comprises: a refrigeration module configured to refrigerate the contents of the removable tote, wherein the removable tote is insulated and configured to transport perishable cargo.
Analysis
(L1) The claim 1 analysis is incorporated. Reference 1 transports removable payloads but does not expressly teach an insulated refrigerated tote. Reference 5 teaches a removable temperature-controlled payload container 106 for transporting perishable items, container housing 302 with insulation, and cooling element 308 including heat-exchanger or compressor refrigeration-cycle components that cool the contents during delivery (paragraphs 0015-0019 and 0022-0031; Figures 1-6). Using that container as Reference 1's removable tote supplies every added limitation.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use Reference 5's insulated, actively cooled payload container as the removable tote carried by Reference 1's cart, because the tubular network is intended to transport varied goods and perishable goods require controlled temperature during transit. The predictable result is reduced environmental heat gain and refrigerated tote contents during network delivery.
________________________________________
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 6.
Claim Text
(L1) The system of claim 1, wherein the pod further comprises: an electrical charging contact configured to make contact with a charging element affixed to an interior of a portal location, wherein the pod is configured to charge during traversal of the portal location while the electrical charging contact is in contact with the charging element.
Analysis
(L1) The claim 1 analysis is incorporated. Reference 1 contemplates cart charging stations and nodes but does not expressly teach physical charging during traversal of a portal. Reference 6 teaches charging while moving: receiver 134 on arm 132 physically contacts fixed conductive rail segments 114 along a movement path and conducts current to the onboard battery of machine 130 while the machine moves (paragraphs 0002-0003 and 0017; Figures 1-4). Mounting a finite conductive segment inside Reference 1's node or portal and the receiver on the passing cart supplies the claimed contact during traversal.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to install Reference 6's fixed conductive charging segment inside a Reference 1 node and equip the cart with the cooperating receiver, because carts predictably pass through nodes and moving contact charging adds energy without removing a cart from service or lengthening a stop. The predictable result is opportunity charging during portal traversal while physical contact maintains the conductive path.
________________________________________
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 7.
Claim Text
(L1) The system of claim 1, wherein the power module further comprises a battery compartment comprising a battery, and wherein the pod is configured to: establish physical contact with an adjacent pod; and charge the battery using a second power supply of the adjacent pod while the pod is in motion.
Analysis
(L1) The claim 1 analysis is incorporated. Reference 1 teaches battery-powered carts and direct cart communications but does not expressly charge one moving cart from another. Reference 7 teaches a receiving vehicle with energy storage 612 and charging panel 608, a provider vehicle with power source 516 and charging plate 520, direct physical contact between the plate and panel, and charging while both the provider and receiving vehicles are in motion (paragraphs 0034-0036, 0049, and 0068-0070; Figures 7, 8, and 11). Those vehicles are adjacent during the contact and the provider power source is the claimed second power supply.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to equip adjacent Reference 1 carts with Reference 7's cooperating charge plate and panel and transfer energy while their movement is synchronized, because one cart can extend another cart's range without occupying a fixed charging node. The predictable result is battery charging through maintained physical contact while both carts continue moving through the network.
________________________________________
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1.
Claim Text
(L1) A system comprising a delivery pod configured to traverse a pipe network, the delivery pod comprising: a set of wheel assemblies positioned to enable contact with a guide rail extending through a hollow interior of one or more pipe segments of the pipe network; (L2) a drive module comprising an electric motor operatively connected to a primary wheel assembly of the set of wheel assemblies; (L3) a cargo module comprising a removable tote and a set of payload sensors positioned to monitor a payload of the removable tote; a pod sensor configured to monitor a status of at least one component of the pod; (L4) a wireless communication module configured to communicate pod status information and payload status information as the pod traverses the pipe network, and to transmit, to a junction of the pipe network, a signal indicating a route of the pod, the signal causing a turntable of the junction to rotate the pod into alignment with an adjoining pipe segment of the pipe network; (L5) and a control module configured to: (i) record sensor data from the set of payload sensors and the pod sensor, (ii) generate pod status information and payload status information based on the sensor data, (iii) transmit, via the wireless communication module, the pod status information and payload status information to a remote service to enable monitoring of the pod as it traverses the pipe network.
Analysis
(L1) Reference 1 teaches autonomous carts 15 traversing rails 11 inside tubular conduit 10 (paragraphs 0055-0067 and 0082-0085). (L2) It teaches wheel motors 25, motor controllers 26, and motor-driven wheel assemblies 21 (paragraphs 0083-0085). (L3) Reference 1 teaches a removable payload supported and transferred at nodes, payload-presence sensors, and cart sensors that measure location, orientation, speed, acceleration, collision distance, odometry, and other cart conditions (paragraphs 0068-0081 and 0086-0089). Those sensors respectively monitor payload and pod status. (L4) Reference 1 teaches telemetry and status communication during traversal, beacon-aided navigation, route planning, node/intersection transceivers, and the turntable-like routing apparatus at a T-junction (paragraphs 0053 and 0088-0095). As explained for claim 1, using the cart's transmitted route to command the disclosed junction controller and turntable supplies the claimed causation. (L5) Reference 1's electronic control, communication, and telemetry module 20 records sensor and status data; its edge and remote optimization tiers receive those data and monitor network/cart conditions for routing and operation (paragraphs 0083 and 0086-0095).
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to configure Reference 1's module 20 to classify its disclosed payload and cart sensor readings as payload-status and pod-status information, transmit that information to the disclosed remote optimization service, and use the cart's route message to command the disclosed turntable, because those data are already collected for monitoring and autonomous control and the selected route determines the required junction branch. The predictable result is remote condition monitoring and automatic junction alignment within Reference 1's existing three-tier control architecture.
________________________________________
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of References 10 and 9.
Claim Text
(L1) The system of claim 12, wherein the control module is further configured to: determine an initial route through the pipe network for delivering the removable tote to a first destination portal; determine, based on the pod status information, that the pod has encountered a malfunction; modify, based on determining that the pod has encountered the malfunction, an intended destination of the removable tote to a second destination portal; calculate an updated route through the pipe network for delivering the removable tote to the second destination portal; and navigate the pod through the updated route.
Analysis
(L1) The claim 12 analysis is incorporated. Reference 1 calculates routes to destination nodes and updates them from cart sensor and network information, but it does not expressly change the payload destination when that cart malfunctions. Reference 10 teaches using robot acceleration sensor 16 and position sensor 17 to detect that robot 1e has malfunctioned, report its state to server 2, and cause the server to calculate replacement routes R4 and R5 based on that real-time malfunction condition (paragraphs 0087-0107; Figures 3, 7, and 8). Reference 9 teaches modifying the intended delivery location of a package from current location 109 to alternate location 111 and transmitting the new package destination through distribution network 107 (paragraphs 0018-0035; Figures 1-3). Applying Reference 9's package-destination change when Reference 10's onboard status comparison identifies a malfunction gives Reference 1's control module the second destination; its known route planner then calculates and follows the route that delivers the tote there.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to initiate Reference 9's package-destination modification when Reference 10's sensor-based malfunction determination occurs in Reference 1's cart, because continuing toward an inaccessible or unsuitable original portal after a carrier fault risks non-delivery, whereas selecting another portal permits recovery or transfer of the cargo. The predictable result is a new route whose endpoint changes with the tote's intended destination, rather than merely a service route for the failed vehicle.
________________________________________
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1.
Claim Text
(L1) The system of claim 12, wherein navigation beacons are configured for one-way communication of location information to the pod, and wherein the wireless communication module is further configured for two-way communication with a set of junction terminals of the pipe network.
Analysis
(L1) The claim 12 analysis is incorporated. Reference 1 teaches fixed radio, RFID, GPS, visual, and BLE beacons or identifiers that provide location references to passing carts and separately teaches bidirectional wireless transceivers and processors at nodes and intersections for exchanging routes, status, and clearance with carts (paragraphs 0088-0095). One-way broadcast location beacons and two-way junction transceivers supply the claimed channel roles.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to operate Reference 1's fixed location beacons as one-way broadcasts and its node/intersection transceivers as two-way junction terminals, because the former only need to announce a stable position reference whereas the latter exchange changing route and status information. The predictable result is simple localization and interactive junction control using the disclosed hardware.
________________________________________
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Claim Text
(L1) The system of claim 12, wherein the set of wheel assemblies comprises: the primary wheel assembly operatively connected to the drive module; and a passive secondary wheel assembly.
Analysis
(L1) The claim 12 analysis is incorporated. Reference 1 teaches motor-driven wheels but does not expressly designate a passive secondary assembly. Reference 2 teaches driven wheels carrying and propelling its rail vehicle and separate non-driven guide wheels that keep those drive wheels centered in the track (paragraphs 0074 and 0115-0116). Those non-driven wheels form the passive secondary assembly.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add Reference 2's passive guide-wheel assembly to Reference 1's motor-driven primary wheels, because non-driven wheels constrain and stabilize the cart without consuming propulsion power or requiring another controlled motor. The predictable result is maintained rail engagement with the existing primary drive.
________________________________________
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of References 3 and 4.
Claim Text
(L1) A method for traversing a pipe network of a delivery system, comprising: inserting a self-powered pod into the pipe network by positioning a set of wheel assemblies to enable contact with a guide rail extending through a hollow interior of one or more pipe segments of the pipe network; (L2) propelling the pod along the guide rail using an electric motor operatively connected to a primary wheel assembly of the set of wheel assemblies; (L3) transmitting, to a junction of the pipe network, a signal indicating a route of the pod, the signal causing a turntable of the junction to rotate the pod into alignment with an adjoining pipe segment of the pipe network; (L4) wirelessly scanning a set of navigation beacons as the pod traverses the pipe network; recording navigation data associated with a payload of the pod based on the set of navigation beacons; transmitting the navigation data to a remote service to enable tracking of the pod through the pipe network; (L5) and delivering the payload by docking the pod into a first destination portal and offloading a removable tote comprising the payload into a cache location of the first destination portal.
Analysis
(L1) Reference 1 inserts battery-powered autonomous cart 15 onto rails 11 inside tubular conduit segments 10 (paragraphs 0055-0067 and 0082-0085). (L2) Wheel motors 25 drive wheels 21 along those rails (paragraphs 0083-0085). (L3) Reference 1 teaches route planning, communications with an intersection, and a turntable-like apparatus at a T-junction that rotates the cart into an adjoining branch; as explained for claim 1, transmitting the selected route to command that disclosed apparatus supplies the recited control step (paragraphs 0053 and 0088-0095). (L4) Reference 1 teaches beacon-based location, recording navigation and payload-related telemetry, and sending information to remote/cloud systems for monitoring and route optimization (paragraphs 0086-0095). (L5) Reference 1 docks at nodes and automatically unloads a removable payload but does not expressly place a tote in a cache. Reference 3 teaches docking cart 122 at induction station 808 and transferring an identified removable tote into container storage 120 (paragraphs 0002-0004, 0055, and 0084-0100). Reference 4 teaches a loader 200 moving totes 100 along linear guides into selected storage shelves 403 (paragraphs 0034 and 0056-0069). Adding that known tote transfer/storage implementation to Reference 1's destination node supplies offloading into a cache location.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to operate Reference 1's route-controlled tubular cart as described and implement its destination-node unload with Reference 3's tote induction and Reference 4's automated shelf storage, because the primary already delivers removable items to nodes and the secondary systems provide a known way to identify, transfer, and temporarily store those items. The predictable result is autonomous pod delivery followed by offload of the removable tote into an available portal cache.
________________________________________
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of References 3, 4, and 7.
Claim Text
(L1) The method of claim 16, further comprising: establishing physical contact with an adjacent pod; and charging a battery of the pod using a second power supply of the adjacent pod while the pod is in motion.
Analysis
(L1) The claim 16 analysis and the combination of References 1, 3, and 4 are incorporated. That combination does not expressly charge a moving pod from another pod. Reference 7 teaches a receiving vehicle with battery storage 612 and charging panel 608, an adjacent provider vehicle with power source 516 and charging plate 520, physical contact between the charging surfaces, and transfer while both vehicles move (paragraphs 0034-0036, 0049, and 0068-0070; Figures 7, 8, and 11). Operating those surfaces on adjacent carts in the combined system performs the recited steps.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to operate adjacent carts of the claim 16 combination with Reference 7's physically contacting charge plate and panel while synchronizing their motion, because vehicle-to-vehicle energy transfer extends cart range without occupying a fixed portal charger. The predictable result is charging from the adjacent cart's power supply while the receiving cart remains in motion.
________________________________________
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of References 3, 4, 8, and 9.
Claim Text
(L1) The method of claim 16, further comprising: determining an initial route through the pipe network for delivering the removable tote to an original destination portal; receiving a notification, via an adjacent pod of the pipe network, indicating that an intended destination of the removable tote has been modified to the first destination portal, wherein the notification was broadcasted to the pod by an external service through a distributed network of pods including the adjacent pod; calculating an updated route through the pipe network for delivering the removable tote to the first destination portal; and navigating the pod through the updated route.
Analysis
(L1) The claim 16 analysis and the combination of References 1, 3, and 4 are incorporated. Reference 1 calculates and updates destination routes but does not expressly receive an external-service destination change through adjacent carts. Reference 8 teaches broadcasting message 212 and successively rebroadcasting relay messages 218, 222, and 226 through adjacent intermediate vehicles 204, 206, and 208 until recipient 210 receives it (paragraphs 0036-0052; Figures 1-3). Reference 9 teaches remotely changing a package delivery destination from current location 109 to alternate location 111 and transmitting the package identifier and changed location into distribution network 107 (paragraphs 0018-0035; Figures 1-3). Carrying that destination-change notification over Reference 8's relay chain provides the claimed receipt, after which Reference 1's cart calculates and follows the route to the changed portal.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to transmit Reference 9's package-destination update through Reference 8's adjacent-vehicle relay chain to the cart of the claim 16 combination, because distributed relay maintains communication in underground or obstructed branches beyond direct external-service range. The predictable result is receipt of the changed tote destination and navigation over a recalculated route to that portal.
________________________________________
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of References 3 and 4.
Claim Text
(L1) The method of claim 16, wherein navigation beacons are configured for one-way communication of location information to the pod, and wherein the pod is configured for two-way communication with a set of junction terminals of the pipe network.
Analysis
(L1) The claim 16 analysis and the combination of References 1, 3, and 4 are incorporated. Reference 1 teaches fixed radio, RFID, GPS, visual, and BLE beacons or identifiers that provide location references to the cart and separate bidirectional transceivers and processors at nodes and intersections for route, status, and clearance exchanges (paragraphs 0088-0095). Broadcasting location from the fixed beacons and conducting two-way exchanges with the junction transceivers performs the claimed method.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to operate Reference 1's fixed location beacons as one-way broadcasts and its intersection transceivers as two-way junction terminals in the claim 16 combination, because stable location identifiers need only announce their references while route and status control requires interactive exchange. The predictable result is efficient localization and junction coordination during delivery.
________________________________________
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of References 3, 4, and 2.
Claim Text
(L1) The method of claim 16, wherein the pod maintains lateral alignment with the guide rail while traversing the pipe network using a set of keep wheels aligned to make contact with a keep wheel contact surface of the guide rail as the pod traverses the pipe network, and wherein an axis of the set of keep wheels is vertical relative to the pod.
Analysis
(L1) The claim 16 analysis and the combination of References 1, 3, and 4 are incorporated. Reference 1 teaches rail-engaging wheels but not the claimed vertical-axis keep wheels. Reference 2 teaches separate non-driven guide wheels whose axes are vertical and whose rolling surfaces contact vertical bot-beam or track walls to keep the drive wheels centered and prevent lateral veering (paragraphs 0074 and 0115-0116). Using those guide wheels as keep wheels on Reference 1's cart performs the claimed alignment during traversal.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add Reference 2's vertical-axis guide wheels to the cart of the claim 16 combination, because rolling contact with a vertical guide surface reacts lateral forces without adding sliding friction or interfering with the load-bearing drive wheels. The predictable result is maintained lateral alignment throughout the tubular rail path.
________________________________________
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 11.
Claim Text
(L1) The system of claim 1, wherein the junction further comprises: a motor configured to rotate the turntable; a sensor flag mounted to the turntable; and a homing sensor mounted at a fixed point relative to the guide rail and configured to detect the sensor flag to determine a rotational position of the turntable.
Analysis
(L1) The claim 1 analysis is incorporated. Reference 1 teaches a turntable-like apparatus that rotates the cart into an adjoining branch but does not detail the drive and home-position sensing. Reference 11 teaches stepper motor 88 rotating carousel or turntable 20, metal home flag 104 mounted on rotor shaft 60 so it rotates with the turntable, and fixed optical home sensor 107/106 detecting that flag to establish the turntable's rotational home position (Figure 5 and the corresponding home-sensor operation description). Applying that motor, mounted flag, and fixed detector to Reference 1's junction turntable supplies the claimed structure; fixing the detector to the junction frame also fixes it relative to the adjoining guide rail.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to drive Reference 1's junction turntable with Reference 11's stepper motor and establish its home position with the mounted flag and fixed optical sensor, because any motor-driven rotary platform that must align precisely with fixed transfer paths needs a repeatable angular reference after startup or position uncertainty. The predictable result is reliable determination of turntable position before aligning the pod path with a selected fixed guide rail.
________________________________________
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues that the amendments to claims 1, 5, 6, 12, 18, and 20 cure the four indefiniteness issues identified in the prior action (Remarks, pp. 11-12). The argument is persuasive. The amendments replace "for" with "to," replace "pod network" with "pipe network," state the mechanical-coupling alternatives in a consistent genus, and place claim 18's final step in gerund form. The prior 112(b) rejections are withdrawn.
Applicant argues that George's enclosed passageway is a multi-lane roadway or corridor rather than the claimed pipe segment and that Lert's warehouse deck does not establish a guide rail extending through a pipe interior (Remarks, pp. 13-15). Reference 1 expressly encloses rails 11 and self-propelled carts inside tubular conduit segments 10.
Applicant argues that adding Lert's rail constraint to George would defeat George's lane-change remediation for a failed robot and that the prior motivation did not address that change in operation (Remarks, pp. 15-16). Reference 1 is already a constrained rail-cart system and therefore requires no conversion from George's free-steering two-lane roadway principle.
Applicant argues that the prior references did not disclose a turntable that reorients the pod or a route signal that causes that operation (Remarks, pp. 16-18). The argument does not overcome the present grounds. Reference 1 expressly teaches a turntable-like apparatus rotating a cart at a T-junction, onboard route planning, and two-way communications with intersection controllers. The present claim analyses identify the difference and explain why using the cart's selected route message to command that disclosed routing apparatus is a predictable integration of Reference 1's own control and mechanical functions. Reference 11 further supplies the motor, mounted flag, and fixed home sensor of claim 21.
Applicant argues that the prior action did not identify one-way location beacons and two-way junction terminals (Remarks, pp. 18-19). The argument is persuasive as to the prior ground but does not overcome the present grounds. Reference 1 separately teaches fixed radio/RFID/BLE location references and bidirectional transceivers at nodes and intersections. Claims 3, 14, and 19 use those disclosed channels for their respective known roles.
Applicant argues that the prior action did not disclose a destination-change notification broadcast by an external service through a distributed pod network and received via an adjacent pod (Remarks, pp. 19-20). The argument is persuasive as to the prior ground. References 8 and 9 now supply the missing teachings: Reference 8 cascades a broadcast through successive adjacent vehicle relay nodes, and Reference 9 transmits a changed package destination into a distribution network. The claim 2 and 18 analyses state why those teachings are combined with Reference 1's route planner.
Applicant argues that the prior action lacked a sensor element on the tote, a lift sensor detecting alignment, a lift moving along a linear guide rail, and cache storage (Remarks, pp. 20-21). The argument is persuasive as to the prior ground. Reference 3 now supplies a tote-mounted RFID tag or label, sensor scanning, alignment with an induction station, and tote transfer into storage. Reference 4 supplies the linear-guide loader and multiple tote storage locations. The claim 7 analysis states the identifier construction and the reason to locate its reader at the lift before engagement.
Applicant argues that Roberts does not insulate a removable tote and places its thermal environment in the vehicle (Remarks, p. 22). The argument is persuasive, and Roberts is not applied. Reference 5 instead places insulation and active cooling in the removable temperature-controlled payload container itself.
Applicant argues that the prior references did not place a charging element in a portal and charge during traversal of that portal (Remarks, pp. 22-23). The argument is persuasive as to the prior ground. Reference 6 expressly teaches physical contact charging while a machine moves along a path. The claim 9 ground places its finite conductive segment inside Reference 1's node to obtain predictable opportunity charging during passage.
Applicant argues that Penilla charges parked vehicles rather than transferring charge between moving adjacent vehicles (Remarks, pp. 23-24). The argument is persuasive, and Penilla is not applied. Reference 7 expressly discloses charging while both provider and receiving vehicles are in motion and discloses direct physical contact between their charging surfaces.
Applicant argues that moving a failed pod to service does not modify the intended destination of its tote (Remarks, pp. 24-25). The argument is persuasive as to the prior ground. The present claim 13 ground does not equate a maintenance route with the tote destination. Reference 10 supplies sensor-based malfunction detection and replacement route calculation, while Reference 9 separately supplies modification of the package's delivery destination. The stated combination changes the tote destination in response to the pod fault and then routes delivery to that changed endpoint.
Applicant argues that the remaining claims are patentable at least because their independent claims are patentable (Remarks, p. 25). The argument is not persuasive against the present grounds because each pending claim has a separate claim-specific unit identifying the inherited primary teaching, the added limitation, the precise difference, and the evidence and reason for supplying that difference.
________________________________________
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.
Claims 1-9 and 11-21 are pending. Claims 1-9 and 11-21 are rejected. Claim 10 is canceled.
The rejections of claims 1, 5, 6, 12, 18, and 20 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in the Office action mailed June 10, 2026 are withdrawn because the September 10, 2026 amendments correct the identified language and clarify the alternatives in claim 6.
________________________________________
Art Considered but Not Applied
US 2024/0241519 A1 was considered for autonomous package-delivery robots in enclosed passageways, but its passageway is a steerable roadway/corridor and it does not provide the claimed rail inside a pipe segment or a turntable that reorients the pod into an adjoining pipe segment.
US 2019/0034857 A1 was considered for temperature-controlled autonomous delivery, but it does not place insulation and refrigeration in the claimed removable tote and does not improve the whole-claim showing over Reference 5.
US 2020/0144838 A1 was considered for a mobile vehicle charger, but its charged vehicles are parked and it does not disclose maintaining physical charge-transfer contact between adjacent vehicles while the receiving vehicle is in motion.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON C SMITH whose telephone number is (703)756-4641. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 AM - 5:00 PM.
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, Joseph Morano can be reached at (571) 272-6684. 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.
/Jason C Smith/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615
