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 .
Response to Amendment
This office action is in response to the amendments filed May 13, 2026. Claims 1 and 8-9 are amended. Claims 1-9 are pending and addressed below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments to the abstract of the specification have overcome the specification objection. The specification objection is withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments to claims 1 and 8-9 have overcome the provisional non-statutory double patenting rejection. The provisional non-statutory double patenting rejection is withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the rejection of the claims under 35 USC 102 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Hosoya does not disclose “correcting, based on the identified positional relationship, the position of the product relative to the reference position by operating the arm unit in the direction in which the plurality of lanes are arranged”. However, examiner notes that the applicant claims that the transfer apparatus is configured to move “a product placed on a stock shelf to a product display shelf”, where examiner interprets this to mean that a product is to be moved by said apparatus from points A to B. As seen by the restocking system of Hosoya (see at least Figs. 12-13), the apparatus appears to correct positional relationships of the product “in the direction in which the plurality of lanes are arranged” by moving the products to the shelves (“operating the arm to correct the positions of the products”) between the different set of lanes (“in the direction in which the plurality of lanes are arranged”). Examiner maintains the rejection for at least these reasons.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 4, and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP2020130192A (Hosoya) from the IDS.
Regarding claims 1, 8, and 9, Hosoya discloses a product transfer apparatus configured to move a product placed on a stock shelf to a product display shelf which is different from the stock shelf, a method of controlling a product transfer apparatus for moving a product placed on a stock shelf to a product display shelf which is different from the stock shelf, and a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program, the computer program when executed by one or more processors, configures the one or more processors to control a product transfer apparatus to move a product placed on a stock shelf to a product display shelf which is different from the stock shelf, comprising:
an arm unit having a holder unit configured to hold the product;
Hosoya discloses an arm unit (see Fig. 6 and [0037], bucket unit 45) having a holder unit (see Fig. 6 and [0037], stock portion 45a) configured to hold the product ([0038]).
an image capture unit configured to obtain image data including at least a portion of the product held by the holder unit for placing the product on one of a plurality of lanes provided on a shelf plate of the product display shelf for displaying the product and placed above the one of the lanes by the arm unit, and at least a portion of the shelf plate including a position of the one of the lanes; and
Hosoya discloses an image capture unit ([0055], camera 71) configured to obtain image data including at least a portion of the product held by the holder unit for placing the product on one of a plurality of lanes ([0055], lanes La, Lb, and Lc) provided on a shelf plate of the product display shelf ([0055], “upper shelf plate 27u” of “shelf board 27” from [0052]) for displaying the product and placed above the one of the lanes by the arm unit ([0053], “Here, the product 100A is placed in the lane La, the product 100B is placed in the lane Lb, and the product 100C is placed in the lane Lc in a row (front-back direction, one direction).”, see also Fig. 11-13), and at least a portion of the shelf plate including a position of the one of the lanes (see Fig. 5, where shelf plate 27 includes lanes La, Lb, and Lc).
a control unit configured to control operation of the holder unit, the arm unit, and the image capture unit,
Hosoya discloses a control unit ([0050], controller 77) configured to control operation of the holder unit, the arm unit, and the image capture unit ([0051]).
wherein the control unit is configured to perform:
identifying, based on the image data, a positional relationship in a direction in which the plurality of lanes are arranged, between a reference position of the lane of the shelf plate on which the product is to be placed and the product placed above the lane; and
See [0055, 0062-0065] and Fig. 8 of Hosoya, where details of the use of a supply order determination unit 83 that identifies a positional relationship of the products and its placement along the lanes is exemplified.
correcting, based on the identified positional relationship, the position of the product relative to the reference position by operating the arm unit in the direction in which the plurality of lanes are arranged.
See [0062] of Hosoya, where a “good display replenishment state” corrects the position of the product relative to the reference position by operating the arm unit in the direction which the plurality of lanes are arranged (“it is necessary to display and replenish one product 100C, five products 100B, and three products 100A”).
Regarding claim 4, with all of the limitations of claim 1, the product transfer apparatus further comprises:
wherein the identifying the positional relationship includes identifying a position of a predetermined portion of the product by analyzing the image data.
Hosoya discloses identifying the positional relationship includes identifying a position of a predetermined portion ([0062], good display replenishment state maintained by replenishing appropriate products in their lanes) by analyzing the image data.
Regarding claim 7, with all of the limitations of claim 1, the product transfer apparatus further comprises:
wherein the product transfer apparatus further comprises a contact detection sensor configured to detect contact of
the product held by the holder unit,
the holder unit, or
the arm unit with an obstacle; and
Hosoya discloses a contact detection sensor ([0074], infrared sensor) configured to detect contact of the product held by the holder unit (product 100).
the control unit is configured to finish operation of the arm unit, of correcting the position of the product relative to the reference position when the contact detection sensor detects contact of
the product held by the holder unit,
the holder unit, or
the arm unit with the obstacle
while the arm unit is operated to correct the position of the product relative to the reference position.
Hosoya discloses the control unit is configured to finish operation of the arm unit (bucket 45), of correcting the position of the product relative to the reference position when the contact detection sensor detects contact of the product held by the holder unit ([0074], “The product 100C moves from the stock portion 45a toward the belt 60a. Then, when the product 100C exceeds one gate 45b, the gate 45b is switched from the gate ON state to the gate OFF state again. Here, in order to determine whether or not the product 100C has exceeded one gate 45b, for example, an infrared sensor (not shown) is used to detect that the cap 101 has passed through the gate 45b, and the product 100C passes through the gate 45b from the stock portion 45a.”), where the operation of the arm unit is to open and close gate 45b to the conveyor belt 60.
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 2-3 and 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP2020130192A (Hosoya) from the IDS in view of US20180260628A1 (Namiki).
Regarding claim 2, with all of the limitations of claim 1, the product transfer apparatus further comprises:
wherein the identifying the positional relationship includes identifying a central position of the lane as the reference position by analyzing the image data.
While Hosoya does not explicitly disclose that identifying the positional relationship includes identifying a central position of the lane as the reference position by analyzing the image data, Hosoya discloses that products 100 are aligned with their lanes (see Figs. 11-13), where the lanes are narrow enough to fit each of the product within a section of the lane.
One of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious that the Hosoya identifies the positional relationship through identifying a central position of the lane through the image data as the camera 71 looks over the lanes while translating with the transport device 47 ([0100]), to ensure proper alignment before shifting the product 100 into a lane or otherwise risking collisions to other packages or toppling as the partitions are by gaps.
Regarding claim 3, with all of the limitations of claim 1, the product transfer apparatus further comprises:
wherein the shelf plate is provided with a partition member for dividing the plurality of lanes; and
See Figs. 5 and 11-13 of Hosoya. The shelf plate contains partition members (gaps in between lanes) for dividing the plurality of lanes.
the identifying the positional relationship includes identifying a position of the partition member as the reference position by analyzing the image data.
In light of the rationale of claim 2, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious that the system of Hosoya identifies the positional relationship by including an identification of a position of the partition member as the reference position by analyzing the image data as misalignment to the partition members would risk undesirable motions of the product such as toppling or collisions of other products.
Regarding claim 5, with all of the limitations of claim 1, the product transfer apparatus further comprises:
wherein the identifying the positional relationship includes identifying the positional relationship using a learned model generated by machine learning beforehand using teaching data and learning data; and
While Hosoya does teach identifying the positional relationship, Hosoya does not teach identifying the positional relationship using a learn model generated by a machine learning beforehand using teaching data and learning data. From a similar field of endeavor, Namiki teaches an image processing device that utilizes machine learning to identify likelihoods of target images (Abstract). Specifically, Namiki discloses identifying the positional relationship beforehand ([0037], “As illustrated in FIG. 4, the machine learning device 2 includes a state observation unit 21, a learning unit 22, an output utilization unit 23, and a label obtaining unit 24. The state observation unit 21 receives input data from an environment 1 such as, for example, detection position, posture, size, and images of detected parts …”) using a learned model generated by machine learning beforehand using teaching ([0038], labels) and learning data ([0038], input image).
One of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious, prior to the applicant’s effective filing date, to combine the system of Namiki to the system of Hosoya as the machine learned model taught by Namiki would allow for both predicting and verifying correct arrangements of positions of the product and positional relationships through learned models, giving an extra level of reliability as a solution.
the teaching data comprises various types of image data and annotation information regarding the positional relationship between the product and the reference position associated respectively with the various types of image data, and
In light of the rationale within claim 5 above, see Fig. 4 of Namiki. As shown in Fig. 4, Namiki discloses the teaching data comprises various types of image data ([0038], partial image cut out from an input image) and annotation information ([0038], labels) regarding the positional relationship between the product and the reference position associated respectively with the various types of image data ([0037], “The state observation unit 21 receives input data from an environment 1 such as, for example, detection position, posture, size, and images of detected parts and the label obtaining unit 24 receives inputs indicating, for example, a success or failure in detection.”)
the learning data comprises various types of image data which are different from the various types of image data of the teaching data.
Namiki discloses the learning data comprising various types of image data ([0038], partial image cut out from an input image) which are different from the various types of image data of the teaching data ([0038], annotations and input image).
Regarding claim 6, with all of the limitations of claim 5, the product transfer apparatus further comprises:
wherein the correcting the position of the product relative to the reference position includes moving the product by a distance associated beforehand with a probability value regarding the positional relationship identified using the learned model.
While Hosoya discloses correcting the position of the product relative to the reference position (see Figs. 11-13, where the transport control of Lb is performed and moved to a different lane when Lb is fulfilled), Hosoya does not disclose correcting the position of the product relative to the reference position by moving the product by a distance associated beforehand with a probability value regarding the positional relationship identified using the learned model.
However, Namiki discloses the use of a probability value regarding the positional relationship identified using the learned model (see at least [0059]).
One of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious, prior to the applicant’s effective filing date, to combine the system of Namiki and Hosoya as the scoring would be a quantified measure of scoring correct positions from 0 to 1, allowing for a finer tuned correction.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAEWOOK JUNG whose telephone number is (571)272-5470. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 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, Wade Miles can be reached on (571) 270-7777. 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.
/J.J./Examiner, Art Unit 3656
/WADE MILES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3656
Prosecution Insights