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 .
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-6 and 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Siemans AG, EP1231164, provided by Applicant.
In Re Claim 1, Siemans AG teaches an automated storage system (Fig. 1) for storing and retrieving items (8) comprising: a rack (Fig. 1) including a plurality of layers (5) and vertical posts (32) for supporting the layers (, each layer including an aisle (2), a plurality of rows (row of cells perpendicular to aisle 2, Fig. 1) extending from the aisle, said plurality of rows including storage locations along the rows-for storing items, (Fig. 2) each row (88)-having a first end near the aisle, a second end and a width, (See Fig. 1 and 2) each aisle having at least one loading position (end of aisle, Fig. 2) and several transfer positions, which transfer position are located along the aisle aligned to the ends of said plurality of rows (Fig. 2) and at least one lift (9) for lifting items to the respective loading positions and for lowering retrieved items from the respective loading positions, each lift including a frame (Frame shown around 9, Fig. 1, 2), having an upper end, a lower end and a horizontal width, (Fig. 1, 2) wherein said plurality of rows include a first row and said at least one lift includes a first lift (9) located between the first and second ends of the first row and the width of the frame of the first lift is substantially equal to the width of the first row. (See Fig. 2)
In Re Claim 2, Siemans AG teaches wherein said plurality of rows (88)-further include at least one second row and said at least one lift includes a second lift locating located between the first and second ends of the second row and the width of the frame of the second lift is substantially equal to the width of the second row. (See Fig. 1 and 2)
In Re Claim 3, Siemans AG teaches wherein the width of a row of the plurality of rows is defined by the distance between the adjacent vertical posts of the rack in the direction of the aisle. (See Fig. 1, 2 and 4)
In Re Claim 4, Siemans AG teaches wherein the frame of the at least one lift has a horizontal length, which is substantially equal to the distance between the adjacent vertical posts of the rack in the direction of the row. (See Fig. 1, 2 and 4)
In Re Claim 5, Siemans AG teaches wherein said vertical posts of the rack are configured to act as vertical support parts of the frame of the at least one lift. (See Fig. 1, 2 and 4)
In Re Claim 6, Siemans AG teaches wherein the automated storage system comprises a buffer, which buffer is located on the first row (buffer space between aisle 2 and lift 9, Fig. 2) between the aisle and the first lift.
In Re Claim 11, Siemans AG teaches wherein said automated storage system further comprises a terminal (10, 12) for receiving storable items and for retrieving stored items and said at least one lift is configured to lift items from the terminal to the respective loading positions and to lower items from the respective loading positions to the terminal.
In Re Claim 12, Siemans AG teaches wherein said terminal is located at least partly below the layers. (Fig. 1)
In Re Claim 13, Siemans AG teaches wherein said automated storage system further comprises at least one shuttle (7) movable along the aisle for carrying storable items from the loading position to the transfer positions.
In Re Claim 14, Siemans AG teaches wherein at least one of the shuttles is a dual shuttle (7, 71) including a first cart (7, Fig. 1) movable along the aisle between the loading position and the transfer positions and a second cart (71) configured to be carried by the first cart between the loading position and the transfer positions, the second cart being movable in either direction between a transfer position and a storage location along a row while carrying an item. (Fig. 1 and Fig. 3)
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claims 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Siemans AG and in view of Segal 2014/0219751.
In Re Claims 7-9 Siemans AG teaches the system of Claim 1 as discussed above.
Siemans AG is silent concerning wherein the at least one lift including a movable platform for carrying items and lifting means including a motor for raising and lowering the movable platform.
However, Segal teaches wherein the at least one lift including a movable platform (14) for carrying items and lifting means including a motor (Paragraph 50) for raising and lowering the movable platform; and wherein the motor (59) is placed at the upper end of the frame and connected to the movable platform (60) via a cable (57); and wherein the motor (Paragraph 50) is placed at the lower end of the frame and connected to the movable platform (30) via a cable (26) and at least one pulley, which at least one pulley (28) is placed at the upper end of the frame.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed to use movable platform and lifting means including a motor in the system of Siemans AG as taught by Segal with a reasonable expectation for success in order to reduce manual labor in the system.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Siemans AG and in view of Yue et al. CN 108820678.
In Re Claim 10 Siemans AG teaches the system of Claim 1 as discussed above.
Siemans AG is silent concerning wherein said lifting means comprises a chain extending from the lower end of the frame to the upper end of the frame and the motor is placed on the movable platform and provided with a gearwheel, which is in connection to the chain.
However, Yu et al. teach wherein the at least one lift including a movable platform (221) for carrying items and lifting means including a motor (222) for raising and lowering the movable platform; (Paragraph 17 and 18)(Fig. 2 and 3) and wherein said lifting means comprises a chain (28) extending from the lower end of the frame (Fig. 2) to the upper end of the frame and the motor (222) is placed on the movable platform and provided with a gearwheel (paragraph 17), which is in connection to the chain. (Fig. 2, Fig. 3, Paragraph 17)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed to use a lifting means comprising a chain and motor placed on the movable platform and lifting means including a motor in the system of Siemans AG as taught by Segal with a reasonable expectation for success in order to reduce manual labor in the system.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Mathi et al., Huiskamp and Salichs teach automated storage system comprising a rack with a plurality of layers an aisle, a plurality of rows and a lift. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GLENN F MYERS whose telephone number is (571)270-1160. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-4 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, Saul Rodriguez can be reached at 571-272-7097. 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.
GLENN F. MYERS
Examiner
Art Unit 3652
/GLENN F MYERS/ Examiner, Art Unit 3652
Prosecution Insights