DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 9-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Lindbo et al. (USpgpub 20180037411).
Regarding claim 1, Lindbo et al. discloses a pillar (fig.2, 16) having a central axis (seen in fig.2) extending in a z-direction for supporting a grid formed of a first set of a parallel rails extending in an x-direction and a second set of parallel rails extending in a y-direction, the pillar comprising at least one constraining feature (see annotated fig.2, two of them are labeled) arranged to prevent a grapple configured to extract a container located beneath the grid from moving relative to the pillar in the x-direction and in the y-direction as the grapple is lowered in the z-direction (intended use, these features would be capable of this intended use; note Applicant’s do not define the actual structure of the constraining feature that allows for this).
PNG
media_image1.png
726
598
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Lindbo et al. discloses the pillar of claim 1, wherein the pillar includes a body (center area of 16) and the at least one constraining feature is provided at a corner section of the body (seen in fig.2).
Regarding claim 3, Lindbo et al. discloses the pillar of claim 2, wherein the at least one constraining feature includes a plurality of constraining features (fig.2, the multiple legs protruding out could be interpreted as the plurality), and wherein each one of the plurality of constraining features is provided at a respective corner section of the body (seen in fig.2).
Regarding claim 4, Lindbo et al. discloses the storage and retrieval system, comprising:
a storage structure including pillars (best seen in fig.1) extending in a z-direction, the pillars supporting a grid formed of a first set of a parallel rails (seen in both figures 1 and 2) extending in an x-direction and a second set of parallel rails extending in a y-direction, the grid defining a plurality of grid spaces; and
a plurality of containers (fig.2, 10) being stackable upon one another to form a plurality of vertical stacks, each vertical stack being arranged within a footprint of a respective one of the plurality of grid spaces (seen in figures 1,2),
wherein each pillar includes at least one constraining feature (seen in annotated fig.2 above) arranged to prevent a grapple configured to extract a container located beneath the grid from moving relative to the pillar in the x-direction and in the y-direction as the grapple is lowered in the z-direction (intended use, the feature is capable).
Regarding claim 5, Lindbo et al. discloses the system of claim 4, wherein the pillars comprise a metal or metal alloy (disclosed as being metal).
Regarding claim 9, Lindbo et al. discloses the system of claim 4, wherein the at least one constraining feature is located at a corner section of a respective one of the pillars (seen in fig.2).
Regarding claim 10, Lindbo et al. discloses the system of claim 9, wherein the at least one constraining feature includes a plurality of constraining features (fig.2, the multiple legs protruding out could be interpreted as the plurality), and wherein each one of the plurality of constraining features is provided at a respective corner section of the body (seen in fig.2).
Regarding claim 11, Lindbo et al. discloses the system of claim 4, wherein each one of the pillars includes a body having a central section, first and second pairs of parallel ribs extending from opposite sides of the central section in the x-direction and third and fourth pairs of parallel ribs extending from opposite sides of the central section in the y-direction such that the first, second, third, and fourth pairs of parallel ribs define four corner sections, and wherein each one of the four corner sections includes one or more of the at least one constraining features (the ribs and constraining features are evident in fig.2).
Regarding claim 12, Lindbo et al. discloses the system of claim 11, wherein each one of the constraining features includes a first protrusion (seen in annotated fig.2 above) extending away from the first and second pairs of parallel ribs in the y-direction and into a respective one of the four corner sections.
Regarding claim 13, Lindbo et al. discloses the system of claim 12, wherein each one of the constraining features includes a second rib (seen in annotated fig.2 above) protruding away from the third and fourth pairs of parallel ribs in the x-direction and into a respective one of the four corner sections.
Claim(s) 1-5, 9, 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Austrheim (NO 345730 B1).
Regarding claims 1-5, 9, Austhrheim discloses the storage and retrieval system, comprising:
a storage structure including pillars (best seen in fig.14) extending in a z-direction, the pillars supporting a grid formed of a first set of a parallel rails (seen in both figures 16) extending in an x-direction and a second set of parallel rails extending in a y-direction, the grid defining a plurality of grid spaces; and
a plurality of containers (fig.7, 106) being stackable upon one another to form a plurality of vertical stacks, each vertical stack being arranged within a footprint of a respective one of the plurality of grid spaces (seen in figures),
wherein each pillar includes at least one constraining feature (seen in figures; given BRI, the corners of the pillars themselves would read and act as a constraining feature for the wheels of the carriage cart seen in fig.16 to engage and travel down the pillar) arranged to prevent a grapple configured to extract a container located beneath the grid from moving relative to the pillar in the x-direction and in the y-direction as the grapple is lowered in the z-direction (intended use, the feature is capable) and
wherein the at least one constraining feature (the corner surfaces of the pillars read on this) is located at a corner section of a respective one of the pillars.
Regarding claim 17, Austhrheim discloses the system of claim 4, further comprising at least one robot (robot seen in fig.10) installed on the grid, the robot including: a body coupled to a wheel assembly (body seen in fig.10 and wheels 32a), the wheel assembly including a plurality of wheels and a drive mechanism arranged to move the body along the first set of parallel rails and along the second set of parallel rails (evident from figures); and at least one grapple (fig.17, guide shuttle of these figures) extendable in the z-direction and arranged to selectively secure and lift one or more containers from a stack of containers, the grapple including at least one carriage (fig.17, 18, at corner 21 of the guide shuttle there are carriages embodied in many forms such as wheels seen in fig.17 to sliders 12 seen in fig.18, to further roller arrangements discussed in the translation) provided at a corner of the grapple to engage the constraining feature of the pillar and to prevent the grapple from moving relative to the pillar in the x-direction and in the y-direction as the grapple is lowered in the z-direction (would perform this function).
Regarding claim 18, Austhrheim discloses the system of claim 17, wherein the at least one carriage includes roller bearings (technically the wheels with bearings in them could read on this, however, the disclosure also explicitly mentions arrangements using roller assemblies).
Regarding claim 19, Austhrheim discloses the system of claim 18, wherein the at least one carriage comprises a first carriage protruding from the corner of the grapple in the x-direction and a second carriage protruding from the corner of the grapple in the y-direction (as best seen in figs.17,18; the carriages protrude at least in part from the corners of the guide shuttle).
Regarding claim 20, Austhrheim discloses the system of claim 17, wherein the at least one carriage includes roller bearings on either side of a recess sized and configured to receive the at least one constraining feature (as disclosed in the translation, in the embodiment with roller assemblies, these assemblies would be sized to engage the recess which is formed by the corner of the pillars and thus reads on the constraining feature; Applicant would have to further define the constraining feature and how the recess relates to it to overcome this interpretation).
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.
Claim(s) 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lindbo et al. (USpgpub 20180037411).
Regarding claims 6-8, Lindbo et al. discloses the use of 4 constraining features, one in each corner as seen in fig.2. Linbo et al. fails to explicitly disclose fewer than those 4 being used.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have tried any number of constraining features between 1 and 4 since it would have been obvious to try or choose within a finite number of identified predictable solutions.The Supreme Court in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) identified that choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success is a rationale that supports a conclusion of obviousness. See MPEP 2143. In this case, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention could the invention to utilize one, two, three or four constraining features as doing so would yield the same predictable result of serving as a guide for the container while lowering. Even with one constraining feature, the container and robot assembly could be aligned and then guided down the grid space. In addition, there is only a finite number of solutions since each grid space only has four corners and thus it would result in four known possible solutions.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14-16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS C DIAZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5461. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-6pm.
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, John Olszewski can be reached at 571-272-2706. 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.
/THOMAS C DIAZ/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3617
Prosecution Insights