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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This communication is in response to the application filed on 4/10/2007.
Claims 15-20 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group II and III, there being no allowable generic or linking claims. Election was made with traverse in the reply filed on 07/20/2026.
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I claims 1-14 in the reply filed on 07/20/2026 is acknowledged.
Applicant's election with traverse of Invention I Claims 1-14 in the reply filed on 07/20/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the examination of inventions would impose no serious burden on the examiner.
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but are not found persuasive.
Regarding “serious burden” MPEP § 803 states, in part, under “Guidelines”:
A serious burden on the examiner may be prima facie shown if the examiner shows by appropriate explanation either separate classification, separate status in the art, or a different field of search as defined in MPEP § 808.02. That prima facie showing may be rebutted by appropriate showings or evidence by the applicant.
The restriction requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 1-14 are currently pending and have been examined.
Specification
The amendment to the Specification is not in compliance with REVISED AMENDMENT PRACTICE: 37 CFR 1.121 (Effective Date: July 30, 2003), because the replacement paragraph is not marked up to show changes made relative to the immediate prior version. Applicant is reminded that the changes in any replacement paragraph or section, or substitute specification must be shown by underlining (for added matter) or strikethrough (for deleted matter) with 2 exceptions: (1) for deletion of five characters or fewer, double brackets may be used (e.g., [[eroor]]); and (2) if strikethrough cannot be easily perceived (e.g., deletion of the number “4” or certain punctuation marks), double brackets must be used (e.g., [[4]]). As an alternative to using double brackets, however, extra portions of text may be included before and after text being deleted, all in strikethrough, followed by including and underlining the extra text with the desired change (e.g., number 14 as)
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Independent claim 1 recites (emphasis added): “calculating a first scan route traversable by the robotic system, to preferentially locate, within the field of view of the robotic system, locations in the store associated with higher first urgency scores...”
The term “preferentially” in the context of the claims renders the claim indefinite. The term “preferentially” is not defined by the claim; the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining what is meant by a route that “preferentially” certain locations in a store over others.
The term "preferentially" in the claim is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term "preferentially" is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Specifically, it is not clear how preferentially the locations with higher first urgency scores would need to be located in order to infringe the claimed invention. Therefore, the scope of the claim is unclear. Same rationale applied to the remaining claims.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome claim rejections under 35 USC 112.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FATEH M OBAID whose telephone number is (571)270-7121. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 A.M to 4:30 P.M.
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, Ryan 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.
/FATEH M OBAID/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627
Prosecution Insights