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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Response to Amendment
This office action is in response to claim amendment filed on 08/31/2026 and wherein claims 1, 2 and 5 being currently amended. In virtue of this communication, claims 1-5 are pending in this office action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see amendment, filed 08/31/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claims 1 and 5 under 35 U.S.C 102(a)(1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Sonoura (US 2020/0150664 A1).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clarke ( US 12,227,218 B1) in view of Sonoura (US 2020/0150664 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Clarke teaches,
A conveyance device (100) capable of conveying or pulling a cart (20/22/24) having multiple wheels at a bottom portion thereof,
the conveyance device comprising:
a main body configured to travel (100);
an engagement member (320) provided in the main body and configured to engage at a predetermined position of the cart (fig. 5A/5B – engagement member engaging below cart);
a camera (450) configured to capture an image of the cart (Col 5 – 35-55 – upper sensor array includes cameras or image sensors to capture image data for tunneling under carts);
a height detection section (450) configured to process the image of the camera to detect a height of the predetermined position of the cart relative to the ground (Col 6 – lines 0-15 – image sensor (425) evaluates structural features, fiducials and other features for tunneling under carts);
a lifting and lowering device (395) configured to lift and lower the engagement member (320) between an initial position lower than the bottom portion of the cart and a position higher than the initial position (Col 4 – lines 45-70 – in lowered position, engagement member is able to slide underneath cart, and raise to a position where cart wheels and based are lifted off of the ground),
and a control section (500) configured to control the lifting and lowering device to cause the engagement member to engage at the predetermined position of the cart based on the height of the predetermined position of the cart detected by the height detection section. (Col 4 – 40-55 – the control environment (500) directs main drive to slide under cart, lift and transport cart based on feedback image data from sensor arrays (400/450)
Clarke fails to teach,
The predetermined position being where the cart is pullable by the conveyance device with the wheels on the ground
However, Sonoura teaches,
The predetermined position being where the cart is pullable by the conveyance device with the wheels on the ground ([0070]
Clarke and Sonoura are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they
are both in the field of cart transporting robots. Therefore, it would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Clarke’s carts to include predetermined position being where the cart is pullable by the conveyance device with the wheels on the ground as taught by Sonoura. As disclosed by Sonoura, maintaining the cart wheels on the ground increases stability during transport, allowing the cart to be transported faster and with less risk of tipping [0700].
Regarding claim 2, Clarke teaches, the conveyance device according to claim 1, further comprising:
wherein the predetermined position is the bottom portion of the cart (col 4 – lines 65-70 – lift table contacts underside of cart),
and the control section controls the main body so that the engagement member enters a lower side of the cart (col 4 – lines 40-55 – control section maneuvers load handler underneath a cart for transport),
and then controls the lifting and lowering device so that the engagement member is lifted to engage at the predetermined position of the cart within a range in which excess or deficiency does not occur in lifting based on the height of the predetermined position of the cart (Col 5 – lines 0-15 - with the cart resting upon the lift table (320). The wheels of the cart will also be lifted off the ground as part of this lifting motion, so that no parts of the cart are contacting the ground).
Regarding claim 3, Clarke fails to teach, the conveyance device according to claim 1,
wherein the cart is provided with a tag member including identification information of the cart or identification information of a package placed on the cart,
the camera captures an image of the cart including the tag member,
and the height detection section detects the height of the predetermined position by recognizing the tag member from the image of the camera.
However, Sonoura teaches,
wherein the cart (90) is provided with a tag member ([0040] – discloses placing a tag with identification information on cart) including identification information of the cart or identification information of a package placed on the cart,
the camera (40) captures an image of the cart including the tag member ([0040] – cart detection device captures cart and tag to identify cart),
and the height detection section detects the height of the predetermined position by recognizing the tag member from the image of the camera ([0041] – tags store cart transport characteristics, including height of a loading part from ground).
Clarke and Sonoura are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they
are both in the field of cart transporting robots. Therefore, it would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Clarke’s carts to include the tag members with identification information taught by Sonoura. Doing so provides a secondary database to cross reference cart heights with, ensuring accurate measurements and lowers risk of carts being misidentified.
Regarding claim 4, Clarke teaches, the conveyance device according to claim 1,
wherein the camera is a depth camera (col 5 - 40-55 – Cameras are capable of capturing images and distinguishing depth and capable of depth tracking data collection),
and the height detection section creates a depth image based on an image captured by the camera and detects the height of the predetermined position based on a distance to the cart obtained from the depth image (Col 6 – lines 0-15 – image sensor (425) evaluates structural features, fiducials and other features for tunneling under carts using the depth cameras).
Regarding claim 5, Clarke teaches, A conveyance method comprising:
capturing an image of a cart having multiple wheels at a bottom portion thereof (fig. 6 – 600) by a camera (Col 13 – lines 0 -15 – step 600 involves using images from sensor array for directing robot transport (100) and detecting cart (900));
processing the image of the camera to detect a height (fig. 6 – 600) of a predetermined position of the cart relative to a ground; (Col 13 – lines 0 -15 – step 600 involves using images from sensor array for directing robot transport (100) and detecting cart (900));
engaging an engagement member (fig. 6 – 604) with the predetermined position of the cart (Col 13 – lines 20-35 – robotic automation engine directs lift drive (395) to raise lift table (320));
in a state where the engagement member is engaged with the cart at the predetermined position (Col 13 – lines 35-50 – step 606 involves transporting lifted cart using robotic transport).
Clarke fails to teach,
and conveying or pulling the cart with the wheels on the ground to a destination
However, Sonoura teaches,
and conveying or pulling the cart with the wheels on the ground to a destination ([0070]
Clarke and Sonoura are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they
are both in the field of cart transporting robots. Therefore, it would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Clarke’s transportation method to include the conveying or pulling of the cart taking place with the wheels of the cart on the ground as taught by Sonoura. As disclosed by Sonoura, maintaining the cart wheels on the ground increases stability during transport, allowing the cart to be transported faster and with less risk of tipping [0700].
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.
/J.S.M./Examiner, Art Unit 3652
/SAUL RODRIGUEZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3652
