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 .
Status of Claims
Applicant’s submission filed 12/10/24 has been entered. Claims 2-5, 11-15 are canceled. Claims 1, 6-10 are presented for examination.
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 1, 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Drago et al. (US 20210158319 A1), in view of HENRY et al. (US 20180322376 A1), in further view of Cobb et al. (US 20130297325 A1).
Re-claim 1, Drago et al. teach -- A system, comprising:
--location signaling hardware for providing a human-perceivable signal to identify a storage location; and
(see e.g. [0031] In view of such, the DLIM system 10 provides a means in which to quickly identify the position of such indistinguishable products in a gantry arrangement or cabinet 15 of one or more shelves 20 by means of a highly visible, illumination indicator strip 25 providing a plurality of lights 30 and/or a screen interaction/graphical user interface (GUI) 35 provided on a display 40, e.g., of a POS device 45. )
--a control system, comprising:
--a database for storing a storage location identifier for each of at least a first item and a second item;
(see e.g. [0007] wherein the processor further includes information relating to which bin each subset of the set of lights of the strip is associated.
[0065] A processor 100, having a memory 160, 165 which stores an item list 170 indicating which items 90 are held within each of the bins
-- a search interface for receiving a request for a storage location for a search item and for determining, based on querying the database, that the search item is stored in the first storage location; and --a signaling hardware interface module configured to direct the location signaling hardware to provide a human-perceivable signal to identify the first storage location.
(see e.g. [0007] An entry device in communication with the processor sends entered requests for item placement or removal to the processor. An indicator strip is attached to the shelf, e.g., along the entire front edge of the shelf, wherein the indicator strip has a set of lights linearly arranged in an single dimension such that an associated subset of the set of lights comprising two or more lights uniquely identifies an associated one of the bins when lit, wherein the strip is in communication with the processor and wherein the processor further includes information relating to which bin each subset of the set of lights of the strip is associated. Selection of one of the items from the list of items via the entry device causes the processor to send a signal to actuate the subset of the set of the plurality of lights which is associated with the bin with the selected item,
[0038] The processor 100 also controls, via sending a signal through the communication interface 105, the selective activation of a subset of lights 115 (of the plurality of lights 30) provided along the indicator strip 25 to help guide a store clerk to a specific bin 80 of a specific shelf 20 which holds a purchased item 90 as also depicted by FIGS. 1 and 2.).
Although Drago et al. teach a first location and a second location (see e.g. [0040] The subset of lights 115, comprising two or more lights, uniquely identifies an associated one of the bins 80 when lit/activated by the processor 100. [0034] A plurality of transverse dividers 85 divide the shelf 20 into the plurality of bins 80. Each bin 80 is used to hold visibly indistinguishable items 90).
Drago et al. do not explicitly teach the location identifier
However, HENRY et al. teach -A system, comprising: -a first [..] storage location having a first storage location identifier; --a second [..] storage location having second storage location identifier;
(see e.g. a location ID for a location at which an asset corresponding to the tag ID is stored and/or available;) .
HENRY et al. also teach --a control system, comprising: --a database for storing a storage location identifier for each of at least a first item and a second item;
(see e.g. [0057] --the central control computer storing at least a copy of the database, the database storing, for each tag ID associated therewith, a location ID for a location at which an asset corresponding to the tag ID is stored and/or available;)
(see also [0150] The part number for that tag is then displayed by the PDA 130 at block 970. This part number may be acquired by the PDA 130 by sending the Tag ID as a query to the location database 939′ and receiving in response the part and/or location ID (as seen in FIG. 9(d)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Drago et al., and include the steps cited above, as taught by HENRY et al., in order to provide a method of tracking the location of an asset at a site (see e.g. [0046]).
Drago et al., in view of HENRY et al., do not teach -a first hanging storage location; a second hanging storage location.
However Cobb et al. teach –(see e.g. [0009] A system for use in a pharmacy includes a computer work station or server, a transmitter, a connector block (signal booster/amplifier), at least one infrared (IR) emitter, and a number of hangers attached to clear plastic bags. Each hanger includes a bag, an IR receiver and two LED lights, one red and one green, as well as a bar code and a chip that is programmed to match the barcode. All of the components are connected by cable, which transmit communications and power, except for the hanger, which is battery operated.
[0010] Then, the prescription is placed into a hanger bag, and the barcode for the bag is scanned into the system to match the prescription information with the specific hanger bag. Next, the hanger bag is placed on a rack.
[0011] When the signal is wirelessly broadcast by the IR emitter, it is received by each of the IR receivers within all of the hanger bags. The target hanger bag with the customer's prescription illuminates the light or lights attached to the hanger, so that the pharmacist can easily find the target hanger bag. All other hanger bags simply ignore the signal, because the signal is unique to that particular hanger bag, due to the programmed chip and barcode attached to that specific hanger bag).
Wherein the location signaling hardware comprises a first LED that is spatially associated with the first hanging storage location and a second LED that is spatially associated with the second hanging storage location.
(see e.g. [0009] A system for use in a pharmacy includes a computer work station or server, a transmitter, a connector block (signal booster/amplifier), at least one infrared (IR) emitter, and a number of hangers attached to clear plastic bags. Each hanger includes a bag, an IR receiver and two LED lights, one red and one green, as well as a bar code and a chip that is programmed to match the barcode. All of the components are connected by cable, which transmit communications and power, except for the hanger, which is battery operated).
[0016] Each hanger bag 18 may include a bag 22 (preferably clear plastic), an IR receiver 24 a transducer (preferably two LED lights 26, one red and one green), and batteries 28, as well as a bar code and a chip that is programmed to match the barcode.
[0021] . In a preferred embodiment, the transducer includes at least two LED lights 26, one red and one green. When the system sends a signal out through the IR emitter 16, the signal is coded to activate only the specific hanger bag 18 that has been requested, and at least one of the LED lights 26 becomes illuminated, or may flash, in order to alert the pharmacy worker to the location of the hanger bag 18 containing the prescription.
[0022] It is contemplated that the transducer or LED lights 26 may be programmed in any desired manner to indicate hanger bags 18 specific to a pharmacy worker. The LED lights 26 may also be programmed to indicate when battery power is getting low.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Drago et al., in view of HENRY et al., and include the steps cited above, as taught by Cobb et al., in order to easily find the prescription/item in the hanger bag (see e.g. claim 10).
Re-claims 6-7, Drago et al. teach --The system of claim 1, wherein the location signaling hardware comprises LED strip lights having at least a uniquely addressable first light from the LED strip lights that is spatially associated with the first storage location and a uniquely addressable second light from the LED strip lights that is spatially associated with the second storage location.
7. The system of claim 6, wherein the signaling hardware interface module is configured to direct the LED strip lights to activate the first light from the LED strip lights that is spatially associated with the first storage location.
(see e.g. abstract ---A shelf for items has bins each with an associated sensor. A processor receives a detection signal from the sensor which indicates placement or removal an item(s) from an associated bin. An entry device sends an entered request for placement or removal of items to the processor, and an indicator strip has lights which uniquely identify each one of the bins when lit. The processor has information relating to which bin each subset of lights is associated, and causes activation of a subset of lights associated with a bin of the item(s) in the request and records in memory a type of action, a time stamp and a quantity of the item(s) placed or removed from the bin having the subset of lights lit and indicated in the detection signal subsequently received from the sensor of the associated bin.
[0040] such that the subset of lights 115, comprising two or more lights, uniquely identifies an associated one of the bins 80 when lit/activated by the processor 100. In one embodiment the lights 30 are LEDs.
Claim 4. The system of claim 1, wherein the lights comprise LEDs,).
Re-claim 8, Drago et al. teach ---The system of claim 7, wherein activating the first light from the LED strip lights comprises at least one from the following list: solid illumination, color change, brightness change, and temporal pattern.
(see e.g. [0046] As best depicted by FIG. 4, the corresponding position of the associated bin 80 is indicated electronically on e.g., display 30, via a visible indicator 200, such as an image, icon, differentiating graphic, color change, etc., which highlights virtually the associated physical position of the one or more selected items 90 contained in the associated shelf 20 of the cabinet 15.).
Re-claim 9, Drago et al. teach ---The system of claim 6, wherein the LED strip lights are mounted on a LED strip light mount.
(see e.g. [0007] An indicator strip is attached to the shelf, e.g., along the entire front edge of the shelf, wherein the indicator strip has a set of lights linearly arranged in an single dimension such that an associated subset of the set of lights comprising two or more lights uniquely identifies an associated one of the bins when lit, wherein the strip is in communication with the processor and wherein the processor further includes information relating to which bin each subset of the set of lights of the strip is associated.
[0040] As best shown in FIG. 2, the indicator strip 25 is attached to the shelf 20 at a front end 133.).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Drago et al. (US 20210158319 A1), in view of HENRY et al. (US 20180322376 A1), in view of Cobb et al. (US 20130297325 A1), in view of Seymour (US 5771003 A).
Re-claim 10, Drago et al., in view of HENRY et al., do not teach the limitation as claimed.
However Seymour teaches -- The system of claim 1, wherein the location signaling hardware comprises an audio indicator configured to identify the first storage location.
(see e.g. -Claim 2 --- . A system for locating items in accordance with claim 1 wherein:
said signals are selected from the group consisting of audible signals, bells, alarms, visual signals, lights, lightbulbs, lamps illuminators, light emitting diodes, release mechanisms, and signaling devices).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Drago et al., in view of HENRY et al., in view of Cobb et al., and include the steps cited above, as taught by Hein et al., in order to prominently identify the location of the product for easy retrieval. (see e.g. col. 5, lines 30-31).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 6-10 have been acknowledged, but they are not persuasive. The Examiner appreciates the affidavits from Shahab Jafri, and Prasad Shetty of Streamline Electronics Manufacturing, Inc. However, they do not negate the prior arts reading on the limitations as presently written.
Furthermore, the Examiner suggests that Applicant review MPEP 716.03(a) regarding affidavits and commercial success.
Applicant’s argument
Neither Drago nor Cobb may be used in a § 103 obviousness rejection because they are not analogous to the claimed invention. Instead, both Drago and Cobb are from the field of small-scale point-of-sale product storage. But the claimed invention facilitates use of simple hangers in a hanging storage solution such that the storage is easily scalable and modified. These features make the claimed invention applicable to industrial large-scale storage situations, e.g., for thousands or millions of small electronic parts.
But Drago and Cobb are both from a very different field. Drago is a point-of-sale system for a convenience store clerk to be able to find specific cigarettes stored in bins. Cobb is a point-of-sale system for a pharmacy employee to be able to find a specific pharmacy order-requiring line-of-sight from an infrared transmitter to each hanger. Neither Drago nor Cobb could be reasonably scaled for use in an industrial setting.
Neither are Drago and Cobb "reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor" of the claimed invention. A person having ordinary skill in the field of industrial storage solutions would not have looked to point-of-sale systems for cigarettes or pharmacy orders.
Examiner’s response:
Drago is analogous art to claimed invention because it is in the same field of endeavor, (i.e. inventory management), (see title- Dispensing and live inventory management system and methods). Drago further teaches “a system comprises a lighting system which guides a store clerk to a specific bin which holds a purchased item and includes a live inventory management application of items held by the bin.” The fact that Drago uses bins as storage instead of hanging storage location does not impact the system that provide a human-perceivable signal to identify a storage location (see e.g. [0002] a system visually guides a store clerk to a specific bin which holds a purchased item both on an electronic display and at the bin and manages via a live inventory the items held by the bin).
Drago is also analogous art to the claimed invention for the additional reason that it is reasonably pertinent to the problem that the claimed invention is seeking to solve because both Drago and the claimed invention involve an inventory management system that identifies storage location of items.
Similarly, Cobb is analogous art to claimed invention because it is in the same field of endeavor, (i.e. locating a specific hanger bag containing a prescription) --(see e.g. abstract ---locate a specific prescription, the specific hanger bag containing that prescription receives a wireless signal from the computer system and activates the transducer on the hanger bag to alert the pharmacy worker to the location of the prescription.) Furthermore, Cobb is reasonably pertinent to the problem of identifying storage location of items via a human-perceivable signal.
Applicant’s argument
No Reason to Combine:
An obviousness rejection based on Drago and Cobb fails because there was no reason to combine these two references. "Rejections on obviousness grounds cannot be sustained by mere conclusory statements; instead, there must be some articulated reasoning with some rational underpinning to support the legal conclusion of obviousness." KSR, 550 U.S. at 418 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Cobb did not disclose the broad idea of using hangers with location-identification lights. Instead, Cobb disclosed using very specialized-and consequently expensive-hangers comprising at least one built-in light, an infrared receiver, and a small processor in a small-scale line-of-sight system. It would not have been possible to combine Cobb with Drago to arrive at the claimed invention because the specialized and expensive nature of Cobb's hangers would have prevented large-scale application as facilitated by the invention of amended claim 1.
Because of the difficulty of running wiring to a hanger, Cobb's solution was to use a wireless infrared line-of-sight communication system with all of the "smarts" built into the hanger. But for Drago using bins made it easier to run wires to each bin for controlling lights and other features. Because Drago and Cobb were working under very different constraints-bins and wires for Drago but hangers and no wires for Cobb-it would not have been obvious how to combine the divergent approaches in these two references.
Instead of attempting to explain why it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine Cobb with Drago to arrive at the claimed invention, the examiner merely provides a conclusory statement: "[I]t would have been obvious . .. to easily find the item in the hanger bag." Office Action at page 8. This is nothing more than an ineffective "mere conclusory statement."
Examiner’s response:
"The combination of familiar elements according to known methods is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results." KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflexlnc., 550 U.S. 398, 416 (2007). "If a person of ordinary skill can implement a predictable variation, § 103 likely bars its patentability." Id. at 417.
1) The cost of the hangers in Cobb is irrelevant to the functioning of the system.
Cobb did disclose the broad idea of using hangers with location-identification lights. (see e.g. [0009] Each hanger includes a bag, an IR receiver and two LED lights, one red and one green, as well as a bar code and a chip that is programmed to match the barcode. [0021] Each hanger 20 includes an IR receiver 24 and a transducer (LED lights 26), as well as a barcode and a memory chip that is encoded to match the barcode. The electronic components within the hanger 20 may be battery powered. The transducer may be any type of component that may alert the worker, particularly through audio or visual means, to the location of the specific hanger bag being requested. In a preferred embodiment, the transducer includes at least two LED lights 26, one red and one green. When the system sends a signal out through the IR emitter 16, the signal is coded to activate only the specific hanger bag 18 that has been requested, and at least one of the LED lights 26 becomes illuminated, or may flash, in order to alert the pharmacy worker to the location of the hanger bag 18 containing the prescription.
Drago teaches the inventory management system as claimed except for the “hanging” storage location having storage identifiers. Cobb teaches an inventory management system with hanging storage including LED associated with each storage location.
Furthermore, Drago teaches set of lights comprising two or more lights uniquely identifies an associated one of the bins when lit,(see e.g. [007]).
Additionally, it is noted that KSR forecloses the argument that a specific teaching, suggestion, or motivation is required to support a finding of obviousness. Under KSR, a claim would have been obvious if the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. Furthermore, under KSR, a claim would have been obvious if a particular known technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art. Thus the claimed subject matter likely would have been obvious under KSR.
The rejection is maintained.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 LUNA CHAMPAGNE whose telephone number is (571)272-7177. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00.
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, Florian Zeender can be reached at 571 272-6790. 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.
/LUNA CHAMPAGNE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627
July 16, 2026
Prosecution Insights