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
Status of Claims
This communication is a First Office Action on the merits in reply to application number 18/849,740 filed on 09/23/2024. The preliminary amendment filed on 09/23/2024 has been entered, which cancels claims 1-10 and adds new claims 11-25.
Claims 11-25 are currently pending and have been examined.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119 and/or 35 U.S.C. 120 and/or 35 U.S.C. 365 is acknowledged is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) filed on 11/14/2024 has been considered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 11-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-patentable subject matter. The claims are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claims 11-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The eligibility analysis in support of these findings is provided below, in accordance with the subject matter eligibility guidance set forth in MPEP 2106.
With respect to Step 1 of the eligibility inquiry (as explained in MPEP 2106.03), it is first noted that the claimed method (claims 11-17), electronic device (claims 18-24), and non-transitory computer-readable medium (claim 25) are each directed to a potentially eligible category of subject matter (i.e., process, machine, and article of manufacture). Accordingly, claims 11-25 satisfy Step 1 of the eligibility inquiry.
With respect to Step 2A Prong One of the eligibility inquiry (as explained in MPEP 2106.04), it is next noted that the claims recite an abstract idea that falls under the “Mental Processes” abstract idea grouping by reciting limitations that could be performed in the human mind (including observation, evaluation, judgment, or opinion). The limitations reciting the abstract idea, as set forth in independent claim 11 are identified in bold text below, whereas the additional elements are presented in plain text and are separately evaluated under Step 2A Prong Two and Step 2B:
receiving a task request, and acquiring idle temporary-storage position information of a workstation shelf, so as to obtain a first code and a second code of the temporary-storage position that have a mapping relationship (The “receiving” step describes activity that could be implemented as mental activity such as by human observation or evaluation. In addition, even if implemented by a computer such as in claims 18/25, the “receiving” may be considered insignificant extra-solution data gathering activity, which is not enough to amount to a practical application (MPEP 2106.05(g)), and such extra-solution data gathering activity has also been recognized as well-understood, routine, and conventional, and thus insufficient to add significantly more to the abstract idea. See MPEP 2106.05(d) - Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1745 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (using a telephone for image transmission); OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network));
updating corresponding temporary-storage position display information in a preset visual operation interface according to the first code, and generating a cargo placement task and sending the same to a transport device according to the second code and the task request (The “updating” and “sending” describe activity that, but for the generic visual operation interface and transport device, could be implemented as mental activity such as by human observation, evaluation, judgment, or opinion, such as with the aid of pen and paper to update or send the information. In addition, the “sending” may also be considered insignificant extra-solution data gathering activity, which is not enough to amount to a practical application (MPEP 2106.05(g)), and such extra-solution data gathering activity has also been recognized as well-understood, routine, and conventional, and thus insufficient to add significantly more to the abstract idea. See MPEP 2106.05(d) - Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1745 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (using a telephone for image transmission); OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network));
in response to a container corresponding to the cargo placement task being transported to the temporary-storage position, updating the temporary-storage position display information in the visual operation interface according to the first code corresponding to the second code in the cargo placement task (The “updating” is activity that, but for the generic visual operation interface, could be implemented as mental activity such as by human observation, evaluation, judgment, or opinion, such as with the aid of pen and paper to update the information); and
determining a cargo pickup quantity corresponding to the container according to the task request, executing a cargo pickup program, and updating the temporary-storage position display information in the visual operation interface according to the first code after cargo pickup is completed (The “updating” is activity that, but for the generic visual operation interface, could be implemented as mental activity such as by human observation, evaluation, judgment, or opinion, such as with the aid of pen and paper to update the information).
Independent claim 18 recites limitations similar to the limitations discussed above and have been determined to recite the same abstract idea(s) as claim 11.
With respect to Step 2A Prong Two of the eligibility inquiry (as explained in MPEP 2106.04(d)), the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. Independent claims 11/18 include additional elements directed to a visual operation interface, transport device, sending the same to a transport device, electronic device, one or more processors, storage device for storing one or more programs, and non-transitory computer-readable medium. The additional elements have been evaluated, but fail to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they amount to using generic computing elements or instructions (software) to perform the abstract idea, similar to adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent), which merely serves to link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment (generic computing environment). See MPEP 2106.05(f) and 2106.05(h). Furthermore, the steps for “receiving a task request…” and “sending the same to a transport device…” at most amount to insignificant extra-solution activity, which is not enough to amount to a practical application. See MPEP 2106.05(g). In addition, these limitations fail to provide an improvement to the functioning of a computer or to any other technology or technical field, fail to apply the exception with a particular machine, fail to apply the judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition, fail to effect a transformation of a particular article to a different state or thing, and fail to apply/use the abstract idea in a meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment.
Accordingly, because the Step 2A Prong One and Prong Two analysis resulted in the conclusion that the claims are directed to an abstract idea, additional analysis under Step 2B of the eligibility inquiry must be conducted in order to determine whether any claim element or combination of elements amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
With respect to Step 2B of the eligibility inquiry (as explained in MPEP 2106.05), it has been determined that the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Independent claims 11/18 include additional elements directed to a visual operation interface, transport device, sending the same to a transport device, electronic device, one or more processors, storage device for storing one or more programs, and non-transitory computer-readable medium. The additional elements have been evaluated, but fail to add significantly more to the claims because they amount to using generic computing elements or instructions/software to perform the abstract idea (See Spec. at par. [0075]: “The terminal devices 701, 702, 703 may be various electronic devices that have a task processing screen and support web browsing, including but not limited to smart phones, tablet computers, laptop computers, desktop computers, and so on”), which is similar to adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent), which merely serves to link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment (generic computing environment) and does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. See, e.g., Alice Corp., 134 S. Ct. 2347, 110 USPQ2d 1976; Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015). Regarding the visual operation interface, this element encompasses nothing more than an interface of a generic computer. See, e.g., Affinity Labs of Texas LLC v. DirecTV LLC, 838 F.3d 1253, 1257-1258 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (mere recitation of a GUI does not make a claim patent-eligible); Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Bank, 792 F.3d 1363, 1370 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (“the interactive interface limitation is a generic computer element”).
Furthermore, the steps for “receiving a task request…” and “sending the same to a transport device…” at most amount to insignificant extra-solution activity, and such extra-solution activities have been recognized as well-understood, routine, and conventional and thus insufficient to add significantly more to the abstract idea, as noted by the CAFC with respect to storing and retrieving information in memory, Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015); OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1363, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93. See also, Mayo, 566 U.S. at 79, 101 USPQ2d at 1968; OIP Techs., Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1092-93 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (presenting offers and gathering statistics amounted to mere data gathering).
In addition, when taken as an ordered combination, the ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present as when the elements are taken individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Their collective functions merely provide generic computer implementation. Therefore, when viewed as a whole, these additional claim elements do not provide meaningful limitations to transform the abstract idea into a practical application of the abstract idea or that, as an ordered combination, amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
Dependent claims 12-17 and 19-25 recite the same abstract idea as recited in the independent claims, and have been determined to recite further steps/details that also fall under “Mental Processes” abstract idea grouping (e.g., observation, evaluation, judgment, or opinion). With respect to the additional elements of “sending the same to the transport device” and “display information in the visual operation interface” (claims 12/19), this activity is considered insignificant extra-solution data gathering activity, which is not enough to amount to a practical application (MPEP 2106.05(g)), and such extra-solution data gathering activity has also been recognized as well-understood, routine, and conventional, and thus insufficient to add significantly more to the abstract idea. See MPEP 2106.05(d) - Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1745 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (using a telephone for image transmission); OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network). Lastly, the function of the visual operations interface in claims 15-16 and 21-22 involves nothing more than an interface of a generic computer, which is an element of a generic computer and insufficient to transform the claims into eligible subject matter. See, e.g., Affinity Labs of Texas LLC v. DirecTV LLC, 838 F.3d 1253, 1257-1258 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (mere recitation of a GUI does not make a claim patent-eligible); Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Bank, 792 F.3d 1363, 1370 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (“the interactive interface limitation is a generic computer element”). Lastly, the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 25 merely invokes an element of a generic computer to implement the method of claim 11, which is insufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or to add significantly more to the claims because this amounts to using generic computing elements to perform the abstract idea, similar to adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent), which merely serves to link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment (generic computing environment). See MPEP 2106.05(f) and 2106.05(h). See also, Alice Corp., 134 S. Ct. 2347, 110 USPQ2d 1976; Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015).
The ordered combination of elements in the dependent claims (including the limitations inherited from the parent claim(s)) add nothing that is not already present as when the elements are taken individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology. Their collective functions merely provide generic computer implementation. Accordingly, the subject matter encompassed by the dependent claims fails to amount to a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
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 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.
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 as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) 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 as of the effective filing date of the later invention 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.
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 of this title, 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 11-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as unpatentable over Shiu et al. (US 2020/0231185, hereinafter “Shiu”) in view of Hance et al. (US 2019/0066041, hereinafter “Hance”).
Claims 11/18/25: As per claim 11, Shiu teaches a task processing method (pars. 3 and 123: systems and methods for controlling AGVs to allow them to pick-up and drop off items at appropriate locations; The steps of a method or algorithm disclosed herein may be implemented in a processor-executable software module which may reside on a computer-readable storage medium), comprising:
receiving a task request, and acquiring idle temporary-storage position information of a workstation shelf, so as to obtain a first code and a second code of the temporary-storage position that have a mapping relationship (pars. 36-37, 57-60, 64, 68-70: work management system can receive requests for AGVs to pick-up and drop of items, assign AGVs to various tasks; The term item, as used herein, can include…shelves; work management system can receive requests for AGVs to pick-up and drop of items, assign AGVs to various tasks, and manage route conflicts between AGVs; When the request is received by the AGV control computer 200, a pick/drop location 105/107 can also be sent; facility management database 112 can store coordinates [i.e., codes] of the pick/drop locations [i.e., first code, second code]; machine readable codes for pick/drop locations can be barcodes attached to a shelf; process 300 moves to step 310 wherein the AGV is requested. The system hub 110 can pass a signal to the AGV translation database 114 for the selected AGV. The signal can include the coordinates or identifiers of the pick/drop locations 105/107 for pick-up and drop off, any time, speed, or other requirements or constraints, and AGV type);
updating corresponding temporary-storage position display information in a preset visual operation interface according to the first code (pars. 40, 95-105 and Fig. 8: describing optical sensor system for continuously monitoring areas of a facility and updating visual grid information based on detected presence or absence of the items, including temporary-storage locations of item locations impacted by pick/drop tasks, and providing computer generated displays with overlays for showing grid depicting the location of cargo in the area, dock, etc. with each location being designated by a “code or other indicator within the square of the grid” – e.g., optical sensor system 230 can continuously look for identifiers within the grid; overlays can be generated in a computer display so as to be visible on a computer, tablet, mobile computing device…status boxes 804, 806 and the status identifiers 805, 809 can give a quick view of which squares of the grid 801 contain it; pick/drop locations 105, 107 can include or can be defined areas indicated on a floor of the facility, on a floor plan of a facility, can be staging areas [i.e., temporary-storage positions]), and generating a cargo placement task and sending the same to a transport device according to the second code and the task request (pars. 37-38, 58-60, 64, 70, and 73: describing a cargo placement task in the form of a request for an AGV to transport items to a drop off location, i.e., destination, having a location designated by a code – e.g., work management system can receive requests for AGVs to pick-up and drop of items, assign AGVs [i.e., transport devices] to various tasks; If there is a known or predetermined drop off location, the process 400 moves to process block 403 where the AGV is requested; drop off destination is input. In some embodiments, the user uses the mobile scanner 210 to scan a machine readable code associated with a drop-off location as the destination; request is received by the AGV control computer 200, a pick/drop location 105/107 can also be sent; facility management database 112 can store coordinates [i.e., codes] of the…drop locations [i.e., second code]);
in response to a container corresponding to the cargo placement task being transported to the temporary-storage position, updating the temporary-storage position display information in the visual operation interface according to the first code corresponding to the second code in the cargo placement task (pars. 35-36, 40, 95-105 and Fig. 8: describing optical sensor system for monitoring areas of a facility, including location of items (e.g., containers) after pick/drop of the items in the facility such as to shelves or staging areas, and providing computer generated displays with overlays for showing grid depicting the location of cargo in the area, dock, etc. with each location being designated by a “code or other indicator within the square of the grid” – e.g., pick/drop locations 105, 107 can include or can be defined areas indicated on a floor of the facility, on a floor plan of a facility, can be staging areas; AGVs can be used to transport items, such as boxes, pallets, or other containers; The term item, as used herein, can include … over-the-road containers; FIG. 8 shows an overhead view of an area of a facility monitored by the optical sensor system 230. FIG. 8 depicts a portion of a dock or other facility area with computer generated overlays; view of the dock shown is an example of the field of view of a camera or sensor in the optical sensor system 230. The dock shown is arranged into a grid 801 of pick/drop locations; each square or location within the grid 801 can be identified…can be a code or other indicator which the optical sensor system; overlays can be generated in a computer display so as to be visible on a computer, tablet, mobile computing device…status boxes 804, 806 and the status identifiers 805, 809 can give a quick view of which squares of the grid 801 contain it); and
executing a cargo pickup program (pars. 12, 37, and 68-69: automated guidance vehicle controller configured to instruct an automated guidance vehicle to pick-up the item at the pick-up location and drop off the item at the drop off location; work management system 100 can command AGVs 102a-c to perform tasks through AGV controllers; AGV translation database 114 can translate the operating instructions form the system hub 110 into the correct format or language for the selected type of AGV; AGV controller 101a-c sends instructions to the AGV 102a-c to accomplish the operation), updating the temporary-storage position display information in the visual operation interface according to the first code after cargo pickup is completed (pars. 40, 95-105 and Fig. 8: describing optical sensor system for continuously monitoring areas of a facility and updating visual grid information based on detected presence or absence of the items, which as a result updates temporary-storage locations of item locations impacted by pick/drop tasks, and providing computer generated displays with overlays for showing a grid depicting the location of cargo in the area, dock, etc. with each location being designated by a “code or other indicator within the square of the grid” – e.g., optical sensor system 230 can continuously look for identifiers within the grid; overlays can be generated in a computer display so as to be visible on a computer, tablet, mobile computing device…status boxes 804, 806 and the status identifiers 805, 809 can give a quick view of which squares of the grid 801 contain it; pick/drop locations 105, 107 can include or can be defined areas indicated on a floor of the facility, on a floor plan of a facility, can be staging areas [i.e., temporary-storage positions]).
Shiu does not teach:
determining a cargo pickup quantity corresponding to the container according to the task request.
Hance teaches:
determining a cargo pickup quantity corresponding to the container according to the task request (pars. 30, 44, 60, 112, 149, 162, 170, and Fig. 17: robot at the automated warehouse may be instructed to prepare the cargo for pickup; where truck 124 is an autonomous vehicle in communication with warehouse and supply-chain coordinator 100, warehouse and supply-chain coordinator 100 determines a pick-up time PT600 for complete quantity CQ600 of goods; the term “pallet” represents a container of one or more goods that can be brought to, stored at, and/or obtained from a warehouse; If a code is present, as would be the case where a pallet having a computer readable code on a label attached to the top…the optical sensor system 230 knows that the item obscuring a location is in fact an item for pick-up…by reading the code; directs truck/autonomous vehicle 124 to arrive at manufacturer 120 at PT600 to pick up the complete quantity CQ600 of goods; each block of the block diagram may represent a module, a segment, or a portion of program code, which includes one or more instructions executable by one or more processors for implementing specific logical functions or steps in the process; robotic devices may be used instead of or in addition to autonomous forklifts at an automated warehouse; autonomous guided vehicles (AGVs) may be used).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Shiu with Hance because the references are analogous since they are each directed to automated warehouse task management features using robots, AGVs, and the like, which is within Applicant’s field of endeavor of managing cargo transport tasks using transport devices such as AGVs, and because modifying Shiu to incorporate Hance’s feature for determining a cargo pickup quantity corresponding to a container and task request, as claimed, in order to serve the motivation to improve efficiency by transporting items to designated drop-off locations to meet operational requirements (Shiu at par. 35) and to facilitate scheduling coordination of cargo loading onto a delivery truck (Hance at par. 30) while also ensuring accurate inventory tracking as well as accurate projections of when inventory may be made available for pickup at the warehouse (Hance at par. 23); and further obvious because the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Claims 18 and 25 are directed to an electronic device and a non-transitory computer readable medium for performing substantially similar limitations as those recited in claim 11 and discussed above. Shiu, in view of Hance, teaches an electronic device and a non-transitory computer readable medium for performing the limitations discussed above (Shiu at pars. 41 and 122-123 functions described herein may be implemented in hardware, digital electronic circuitry, computer software; method or algorithm disclosed herein may be implemented in a processor-executable software module which may reside on a computer-readable storage medium; See also, Hance at pars. 5, 70, 192-195: non-transitory computer readable medium; One or more computing devices executing software), and claims 18 and 25 are therefore rejected using the same references and for substantially the same reasons as set forth above.
Claims 12/19: Shiu further teaches in response to the execution of the cargo pickup program being completed, generating a cargo taking task and sending the same to the transport device according to the second code (pars. 12, 37, 48, 58, 67-69, 74, and 82: automated guidance vehicle controller configured to instruct an automated guidance vehicle to pick-up the item at the pick-up location and drop off the item at the drop off location; translate the operating instructions form the system hub 110 into the correct format or language for the selected type of AGV; AGV controller 101a-c sends instructions to the AGV 102a-c to accomplish the operation; AGV completes its current mission; AGVs can pick-up and drop off items; select pick-up and drop-off off locations on the screen to request an AGV transport items between the two locations; transmits the destination pick-up and drop-off locations for the AGV to the work management system; system hub 110 can identify loading dock 2 as the required destination, and can select a pick/drop location 107 at loading dock which is not occupied, or which is available to receive the item); and in response to the cargo taking task of the transport device being completed, updating the temporary-storage position display information in the visual operation interface according to the first code corresponding to the second code in the cargo taking task (pars. 40, 95-105 and Fig. 8: describing optical sensor system for continuously monitoring areas of a facility and updating visual grid information based on detected presence or absence of the items, including changes from pick-ups and drop-offs of items/cargo, which updates temporary-storage locations of item locations impacted by pick/drop tasks, and providing computer generated displays with overlays for showing a grid depicting the location of cargo in the area, dock, etc. with each location being designated by a “code or other indicator within the square of the grid” – e.g., optical sensor system 230 can continuously look for identifiers within the grid; overlays can be generated in a computer display so as to be visible on a computer, tablet, mobile computing device…status boxes 804, 806 and the status identifiers 805, 809 can give a quick view of which squares of the grid 801 contain it; pick/drop locations 105, 107 can include or can be defined areas indicated on a floor of the facility, on a floor plan of a facility, can be staging areas [i.e., temporary-storage positions]).
Claims 13/20: Shiu further teaches after receiving the task request, comprises: acquiring current configuration information of the workstation shelf, and judging whether there is a temporary-storage position with an idle status (pars. 53-54: determine the most appropriate AGV to handle a specific AGV request and to handle any potential route collisions between AGVs including advance mapping of routes to maximize efficiency. In some embodiments, the route database 113 can know the current location of every AGV in the system either by having AGVs report their location or using a system; the AGVs can also report whether they are currently delivering items between pick-up and drop-off locations and what their planned route is; when the work management system 100 receives a request for an AGV, route management database 113 can assign an AGV to the request base on which AGVs are currently busy, what kind of load will be picked up, the distance of the various AGVs to the pick-up point, the battery life of the various AGVs and any anticipated future need of the AGV. For example, if the work management system 100 receives a request that can be handled by any type of AGV it could prioritize assigning the type of AGV that the facility has the most of); if it is determined that there is a temporary-storage position with an idle status, judging whether a preset waiting queue includes the task request, and if it is determined that a preset waiting queue includes the task request, pulling the task request in the waiting queue and putting a currently received task request into the waiting queue; if it is determined that a preset waiting queue does not include the task request, executing the currently received task request; and if it is determined that there is not a temporary-storage position with an idle status, putting the currently received task request into the preset waiting queue (Examiner’s Note: The preceding limitations of pulling, putting, executing, and putting are conditional and not required because they are preceded by the conditional phrase “if it is determined …,” such that each corresponding steps need only be performed if the condition is true. Accordingly, under a broadest reasonable interpretation, the claim covers a scenario in which each condition is not true, such that the corresponding steps are not required by the claim and therefore this claim language does not impose additional patentable weight on the claim).
Claims 14/21: Shiu further teaches after receiving the task request, further comprises: identifying a task type according to the task request, so as to acquire corresponding attribute information based on the task type; and generating a cargo placement task according to the attribute information and the second code (pars. 54, 57, 65-67: e.g., For example, if the work management system 100 receives a request that can be handled by any type of AGV it could prioritize assigning the type of AGV that the facility has the most of; route management database 113 can also calculate an expected arrival time for every AGV to any particular pick-up or drop-off location in order to allow the route management database 113 to assign AGVs based on the expected arrival time for every AGV; For example, the work management system 100 could send a “material move request” or “item transport request” to the AGV translation module 114 intended for communication to an AGV of a certain type and made by a certain manufacturer. The AGV translation module 114 can translated the request into an appropriate message for that AGV. If the same command is this sent to an AGV made by a different manufacturer, the AGV translation module 114 could then translate it into an appropriate message for that AGV and so on and so forth; when an AGV is requested, the work management system 100 can, based on the pick/drop location, identify the proper type of AGV to transport the item).
Claims 15/22: Shiu further teaches monitoring that text information exists in an input box corresponding to the first code in the visual operation interface; and identifying the text information, and determining a corresponding execution program, so as to process the temporary-storage position having the first code (pars. 63-64, 68, 95, 98, and Fig. 8: e.g., FIG. 8 shows an overhead view of an area of a facility monitored by the optical sensor system 230. FIG. 8 depicts a portion of a dock or other facility area with computer generated overlays to illustrate the system [showing text information of “Empty” or “Occupied” in grid boxes]. The view of the dock shown is an example of the field of view of a camera or sensor in the optical sensor system 230. The dock shown is arranged into a grid 801 of pick/drop locations [each having a corresponding code indicating its location as a temporary-storage position, e.g., first code, second code for pick/drop locations]. The grid is divided into lanes by lines 803…The lines 803 can provide an indication to operators where in the dock or facility the grid 801 is located which is monitored by the optical sensor system; identify or store a status of each square within the grid 801. For example, the status of a square [i.e., box] can be empty or occupied. For ease of illustration, the grid squares are shown with a status box 804 around each target 807, and each square contains a status identifier “Empty” 809 or “Occupied” 805, as applicable; provide the coordinates [i.e., first code] of the item to be picked up to the AGV; operator or the optical sensor system 230 can identify the occupied square of the grid 801, and can summon an AGV as described herein, by inputting the grid reference number of the occupied square; operator can access an interface on the AGV control computer to request a pick-up of the item. If the AGV control computer 200 is associated with a single pick/drop location 107, the request can be sent to the work management system 100 that an item is ready for pick-up at the pick/drop location 105/107 associated with the AGV control computer. In some embodiments, where the AGV control computer 200 is associated with more than one pick/drop location 105/107, the operator can select the one of a plurality of pick/drop locations 105/107 where the item for pick-up is located).
Claims 16/23: Shiu further teaches in response to selecting an operation control corresponding to the first code in the visual operation interface, identifying a type of the operation control, and acquiring a corresponding operation program (pars. 6, 14, 17, 58, and 67: select an automated guidance vehicle to be instructed by the automated guidance vehicle controller based at least in part on the selected pick-up location and the locations and status of the automated guidance vehicles; user of AGV control computer 200 can select pick-up and drop-off off locations [locations represented by first/second codes] on the screen to request an AGV transport items between the two locations; When the work management system 100 has determined the pick-up location, the drop off location, and the type of AGV required, the work management system 100 determines the route for the AGV [corresponding operation program]. Determining the route for the AGV can include assessing the locations of all AGVs within the facility and determining which AGV of the correct type is the proper, best, or ideal AGV to complete the route. For example, the work management system can evaluate which AGV several factors: which AGV is closest to the pick-up location, which AGV has sufficient battery capacity to move to the pick/drop location 105 to pick-up the item and move to the pick/drop location 107 to drop off the item; which AGV of the correct type will be nearest the pick/drop location 105 when the AGV completes its current mission; AGV size and speed based on the selected route; obstacles along the proposed route; and any other desired parameter. The route for the chosen AGV is determined based on the pick/drop location 105 where the pick-up is to occur and the pick/drop location where the drop off is to occur; the location of other AGVs, the priority of the item to be picked up, etc. if an item has high priority, for example, if the item is valuable, has a high class of service, is in danger of missing a service class time window, etc., these factors can also be considered. The work management system 100 may halt or pause other AGV operations where an item has a high priority, in order to expedite or maximize efficiency of the AGV which will transport the high priority item); and judging whether there are multiple operation programs (pars. 54, 65, and 67: work management system 100 receives a request that can be handled by any type of AGV it could prioritize assigning the type of AGV that the facility has the most of; In some embodiments, the type of AGV can be selected on the AGV control computer 200 by the operator; Determining the route for the AGV can include assessing the locations of all AGVs within the facility and determining which AGV of the correct type is the proper, best, or ideal AGV to complete the route), and if it is determined that there are multiple operation programs, processing the temporary-storage position having the first code in response to the selected operation program; if it is determined that there are not multiple operation programs, executing the operation program to process the temporary-storage position having the first code (Examiner’s Note: The preceding steps of processing and executing are not required to be performed by the claim because they are preceded by the conditional phrase “if it is determined …,” such that each corresponding step need only be performed if the condition is true. Accordingly, under a broadest reasonable interpretation, the claim covers a scenario in which each condition is not true, such that the corresponding steps are not required by the claim and therefore this claim language does not impose additional patentable weight on the claim).
Claims 17/24: Shiu further teaches providing the workstation shelf with front and rear sides, and configuring the front and rear sides of each temporary-storage position on the workstation shelf with corresponding first and second codes, respectively (pars. 36, 51, 60, and 70: can include pallets, … over-the-road containers, racks, nutting trucks, shelves; If a code is present, as would be the case where a pallet having a computer readable code on a label attached to the top, side, or other surface of the pallet; In some embodiments, the AGV can continually scan in front of it to determine if an object could have a machine readable code on it. If there is a possible code on the object, the machine readable code can then continually adjust the field of view and vertical or horizontal position of the camera or optical sensor to allow the camera or sensor to scan the code as the AGV approaches the machine readable code. In some embodiments, if the AGV sense multiple available machine readable codes that it could scan, it can adjust the camera or optical sensor to scan all of the available codes [i.e., scan top, side, other surface], and then determine which code corresponds to the package that the AGV will pick-up; The machine readable codes for pick/drop locations [i.e., first code, second code] can be barcodes attached to a shelf, to the mail processing equipment, or the like).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Krishnan (US Pat. No. 10,958,895): discloses features for high speed automated capturing of 3D models of packaged items, including receiving a task request, and acquiring idle temporary-storage position information of a workstation shelf, so as to obtain a first code and a second code of the temporary-storage position that have a mapping relationship (col. 2 lines 22-41, col. 8 lines 1-5, col. 6 lines 22-39: inventory holders may be entire racks of shelves, with each shelf having bins for various inventory items. Mobile drive units may be self-powered robotic devices configured to move freely about the warehouse; generate requests to initiate any of a number of particular operations involving the mobile drive units 112, inventory holders 114, or other elements of inventory system; A first line of three pick locations 122 is mapped next to a picking area in which a picker 126 picks inventory from the inventory holders 114 at the pick locations 122 and loads them into boxes or containers supported by another inventory holder 114(4) mounted on a mobile drive unit 112(4); picker may alternatively or additionally involve a mechanical picking apparatus. A second line of two staging locations 124 is mapped adjacent to, but spaced from, the first line of pick locations 122. The staging locations 124 temporarily hold inventory holders 114 on the way to and from the pick locations 122 of the pick station).
Owan et al. (US Patent No. 12,487,587): discloses visual perception and techniques for placing inventory into pods with a robotic workcell, including receiving a task request, and acquiring idle temporary-storage position information of a workstation shelf, so as to obtain a first code and a second code of the temporary-storage position that have a mapping relationship (col. 4 lines 42-58: control system 110 may communicate a task assignment 140 that identifies (and defines) the location of an inventory holder 160 within a holding area 130 (e.g., holding area 130-1); task assignment 140 may instruct the drive unit 120 to retrieve the inventory holder 160 within the holding area 130, to transition (or move) the inventory holder 160 to a workcell 150 (e.g., workcell 150-1 or another location), and to hold (or park) the inventory holder 160 within the workcell 150 until receiving another task (or command)).
Grissom et al. (US 2015/0262118): discloses features for automatic reorganization of pick slot assignment in a warehouse, including generating a cargo placement task and sending the same to a transport device according to a code and the task request (at least par. 52).
J. Liu, J. Li and T. Jiang, "Research on the reengineering of warehousing process based on Internet of Things," 2014 IEEE International Conference on Progress in Informatics and Computing, Shanghai, China, 2014, pp. 567-571: discloses a warehousing system framework using the Internet of Things (IoT) technology.
M. Z. Ur Rahman, M. K. Kanchi, M. A. Aleem Pasha and B. K. Yadla, "Design and Development of Autonomous Warehouse Management Robot with Intelligent Software Framework," 2021 IEEE International Conference on Mobile Networks and Wireless Communications (ICMNWC), Tumkur, Karnataka, India, 2021, pp. 1-7: discloses automated guided vehicles (e.g., self-driving forklifts) for transporting inventory throughout a warehouse.
L. G. Bao, T. G. Dang and N. D. Anh, "Storage Assignment Policy and Route Planning of AGVS in Warehouse Optimization," 2019 International Conference on System Science and Engineering (ICSSE), Dong Hoi, Vietnam, 2019, pp. 599-604: discloses optimal routing of vehicles in a warehouse, such as automated guided vehicle systems (AGVS), to optimize vehicle travel time, avoid traffic congestion, solve storage assignment problems, and the like.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to Timothy A. Padot whose telephone number is 571.270.1252. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, 8:30 - 5:30. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s supervisor, Brian Epstein can be reached at 571.270.5389. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571- 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). 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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/TIMOTHY PADOT/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3625
04/29/2026
Prosecution Insights