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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and have been entered into the record. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims1-9 and 11-20 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 1-9 and 11-20 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.
With respect to Step 1 of the eligibility inquiry (as explained in MPEP 2106), it is first noted that the method (claims 1-7), computer program product (claims 11-17), and apparatus (claims 8-9 and 18-20) are directed to potentially eligible categories of subject matter (i.e., process, machine, and article of manufacture respectively). Thus, Step 1 is satisfied.
With respect to Step 2, and in particular Step 2A Prong One, it is next noted that the claims recite an abstract idea by reciting fundamental economic principles or practices (including hedging, insurance, mitigating risk); commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations); managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions) which falls into the “Certain methods of organizing human activity” within the enumerated groupings of abstract ideas; (the claims describe determining order assignment(s) for commodities in for inventory management system, sales activities or behaviors; business relations within Certain methods of organizing human activity). The mere nominal recitation of a generic computer does not take the claim limitation out of methods of organizing human activity grouping.
The limitations reciting the abstract idea(s) (Certain methods of organizing human activity), as set forth in exemplary claim 1, are: receiving an order comprising at least one to-be-picked commodity; determining, for each workstation in at least one workstation, an outbound turnover box assigned to the workstation, wherein the outbound turnover box is being in an outbound shipping; detecting, based on articles in the outbound turnover box, whether a first article matching the order is present in the outbound turnover box; in response to detecting that the first article matching the order is present in the outbound turnover box, detecting whether the first article is all of to-be-picked commodities in the order; and in response to detecting that the first article is all of the to-be-picked commodities in the order, binding the order to the outbound turnover box corresponding to the first article, and assigning the order to the workstation. Independent claims 8 and 11 recite the CRM and apparatus for performing the method of independent claim 1 without adding significantly more. Thus, the same rationale/analysis is applied.
With respect to Step 2A Prong Two, the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The additional elements are directed to: at least one a processor; and a memory communicatively connected to the at least one processor, wherein the memory stores instructions that can be executed by the at least one processor, so that the at least one processor is capable of performing operations, the operations comprising; A non-transitory computer readable medium, storing a computer program thereon, wherein, the program, when executed by a processor (as recited in claims 8 and 11). However, these elements fail to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they 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.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).
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, it has been determined that the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The additional limitation(s) is/are directed to: at least one a processor; and a memory communicatively connected to the at least one processor, wherein the memory stores instructions that can be executed by the at least one processor, so that the at least one processor is capable of performing operations, the operations comprising; A non-transitory computer readable medium, storing a computer program thereon, wherein, the program, when executed by a processor (as recited in claims 8 and 11) for implementing the claim steps/functions. These elements have been considered, but merely serve to tie the invention to a particular operating environment (i.e., computer-based implementation), though at a very high level of generality and without imposing meaningful limitation on the scope of the claim.
In addition, Applicant’s Specification (paragraph [0133]) describes generic off-the-shelf computer-based elements for implementing the claimed invention, and which does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea, which is not enough to transform an abstract idea into eligible subject matter. Such generic, high-level, and nominal involvement of a computer or computer-based elements for carrying out the invention merely serves to tie the abstract idea to a particular technological environment, which is not enough to render the claims patent-eligible, as noted at pg. 74624 of Federal Register/Vol. 79, No. 241, citing Alice, which in turn cites Mayo. See, e.g., 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 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 conventional 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 the ordered combination amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. Further, the courts have found the presentation of data to be a well-understood, routine, conventional activity, OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1362-63, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93 (see MPEP 2106.05(d)).
The dependent claims (2-7, 9, and 12-20) are directed to the same abstract idea as recited in the independent claims, and merely incorporate additional details that narrow the abstract idea via additional details of the abstract idea. For example claims 2-7 “in response to detecting that the first article is part of the to-be-picked commodities in the order or in response to not detecting the first article, determining a returning turnover box assigned to the workstation, wherein the returning turnover box is being in a warehouse return shipping; detecting, based on articles in the returning turnover box, whether a second article matching the order is present in the returning turnover box; in response to detecting that the second article matching the order is present in the returning turnover box, detecting whether a sum of the first article and the second article is all of the to-be-picked commodities in the order; and in response to detecting that the sum of the first article and the second article is all of the to-be-picked commodities in the order, binding the order to the returning turnover box corresponding to the second article; in response to detecting that the first article is part of the to-be-picked commodities in the order or in response to not detecting the first article, determining a returning turnover box assigned to the workstation, wherein the returning turnover box is being in a warehouse return shipping; detecting, based on articles in the returning turnover box, whether a second article matching the order is present in the returning turnover box; in response to detecting that the second article matching the order is present in the returning turnover box, detecting whether a sum of the first article and the second article is all of the to-be-picked commodities in the order; and in response to detecting that the sum of the first article and the second article is all of the to-be-picked commodities in the order, binding the order to the returning turnover box corresponding to the second article; in response to not detecting the first article and the second article, scoring a commodity corresponding to the order in the at least one workstation to obtain an order score corresponding to the at least one workstation; determining, based on the order score, a first workstation satisfying the order in the at least one workstation; assigning the order to the first workstation; and selecting, based on a distance between an aisle and the first workstation and a task volume of the aisle, in the aisle a second in-warehouse turnover box corresponding to the order, and binding the second in-warehouse turnover box to the order; wherein the scoring a commodity corresponding to the order in the at least one workstation to obtain an order score corresponding to the at least one workstation, comprises: scoring a number of types of same articles in the at least one workstation as the to-be-picked commodities in the order, to obtain a type score; scoring a distance of same articles in the at least one workstation as the to-be- picked commodities in the order, to obtain a distance score; and obtaining the order score based on the type score and the distance score; calculating a ratio of a number of types of articles, same as the to-be-picked commodities in the order, in the turnover box and the in-warehouse turnover box bound to each workstation in the at least one workstation, same as the to-be-picked commodities in the order, to the number of types of the to-be-picked commodities in the order, to obtain an order sub-score; calculating a ratio of a number of types of articles, same as the to-be-picked commodities in the order, in an aisle where the in-warehouse turnover box bound to each workstation in the at least one workstation is located to the number of types of the to-be-picked commodities in the order, to obtain an aisle sub-score; and obtaining the type score based on the order sub-score and the aisle sub-score; in response to a historical pooled order being of a same type as the order and orders in the historical pooled order not reaching a preset number of orders, adding the order to the historical pooled order; and in response to the historical pooled order not being of a same type as the order, determining a type of the order, and assigning a corresponding slot in the first workstation for the type of the order, recording a volume of the slot and an upper limit of the slot on the number of orders”, without additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and without additional elements that amount to significantly more to the claims. The remaining dependent claims (9 and 12-20) recite the CRM and apparatus for performing the method of claims 2-7. Thus, the same rationale/analysis is applied. Thus, all dependent claims have been fully considered, however, these claims are similarly directed to the abstract idea itself, without integrating it into a practical application and with, at most, a general-purpose computer that serves to tie the idea to a particular technological environment, which does not add significantly more to the claims.
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 conventional computer implementation. Accordingly, the subject matter encompassed by the dependent claims fails to amount to 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.
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.
Claims 1-9 and 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. PGPub 20240354698 (hereinafter “Lin”) et al., in view of U.S. PGPub 20220106121 to (hereinafter “Puite”) et al.
As per claim 1, Lin teaches a method for assigning an order, the method comprising:
receiving an order comprising at least one to-be-picked commodity;0053-0054: “ Step S201: Obtain at least one to-be-processed order corresponding to a target workstation. The target workstation may be any one or more workstations in a warehousing system to which to-be-processed orders are issued. The to-be-processed orders may be orders such as warehouse management orders and outbound orders that require carrying totes to the corresponding target workstations. An order demand of the to-be-processed order includes a type and a quantity of target items corresponding to the to-be-processed order. The target items are the items that need to be retrieved in the to-be-processed order and that are stored in the totes on the storage shelving unit of the warehousing system, which may be clothes, cosmetics, vehicle components, and the like.”
determining, for each workstation in at least one workstation, an outbound turnover box assigned to the workstation…; 0041-0057: “The dispatching device 150 is configured to assign the workstation 140 to an order, and is further configured to assign totes stored on the storage shelving unit 110 to an outbound order, so that the robot 120 carries a tote corresponding to the outbound order to a conveyor 130 connected to a workstation 140 corresponding to the outbound order. The tote corresponding to the outbound order is transported, through the conveyor 130, to the workstation corresponding to the outbound order, so that goods stored in the tote are sorted through the workstation, to complete the outbound order… When a quantity of outbound orders is large, the workstation 140 corresponds to a plurality of outbound orders. In some embodiments, the workstation 140 is often used as a unit, and each outbound order received by the workstation 140 is considered as a whole, so that the totes are assigned based on an order demand of each outbound order, to determine a tote that needs to be carried by the robot 120 to the workstation 140. Therefore, the robot 120 performs path planning based on a storage location of each tote on the storage shelving unit 110, to retrieve each tote corresponding to the workstation 140….Specifically, when receiving each to-be-processed order, a dispatching device of the warehousing system may assign a workstation to each to-be-processed order, thereby obtaining a target workstation corresponding to each to-be-processed order, or obtaining a to-be-processed order corresponding to each target workstation.”
detecting, based on articles in the outbound turnover box, whether a first article matching the order is present in the outbound turnover box; 0066-0078: “Specifically, if a tote is hit by one of the to-be-processed orders, that is, the tote is determined as the target tote of one of the to-be-processed orders, the tote is not considered when a target tote is assigned to another to-be-processed order. Specifically, if goods stored in the tote meet a first demand and a second demand of the to-be-processed order, the tote may be determined as a target tote corresponding to the first demand and the second demand of the to-be-processed order. That is, the tote is hit by the first demand and the second demand of the to-be-processed order. Types or SKUs of goods required for the first demand and the second demand are different, and processing sequences of the types of the goods required for the first demand and the second demand are consecutive in the to-be-processed order…Specifically, based on a quantity of target items in the order demand of the to-be-processed order, whether there is a single tote that meets the order demand may be searched from the totes stored in the warehousing system. Each of the target items required in the order demand of the to-be-processed order is stored in the tote.”
in response to detecting that the first article matching the order is present in the outbound turnover box, detecting whether the first article is all of to-be-picked commodities in the order; and 0067-0078: “Specifically, if goods stored in the tote meet a first demand and a second demand of the to-be-processed order, the tote may be determined as a target tote corresponding to the first demand and the second demand of the to-be-processed order. That is, the tote is hit by the first demand and the second demand of the to-be-processed order. Types or SKUs of goods required for the first demand and the second demand are different, and processing sequences of the types of the goods required for the first demand and the second demand are consecutive in the to-be-processed order…Specifically, based on a quantity of target items in the order demand of the to-be-processed order, whether there is a single tote that meets the order demand may be searched from the totes stored in the warehousing system. Each of the target items required in the order demand of the to-be-processed order is stored in the tote, and a quantity of target items stored in the tote is greater than or equal to the quantity of target items in the order demand of the to-be-processed order. If there is a single tote that meets the order demand, the single tote is determined as the target tote of the to-be-processed order.”
in response to detecting that the first article is all of the to-be-picked commodities in the order, binding the order to the outbound turnover box corresponding to the first article, 0064-0085: “Step S202: Determine target totes and a carrying sequence of each of the target totes according to an order demand of the at least one to-be-processed order and a processing sequence corresponding to each to-be-processed order…Specifically, after the target totes and the carrying sequence of each of the target totes are determined, the carrying instruction for the robot may be generated based on the to-be-processed order corresponding to each of the target totes and the carrying sequence of each of the target totes, thereby controlling the robot to retrieve, in the corresponding carrying sequence, each of the target totes corresponding to each to-be-processed order, and carry each of the target totes to the corresponding target workstation.”
Lin may not explicitly teach the following. However, Puite teaches:
wherein the outbound turnover box is being in an outbound shipping;0048-0049: “The module 68a splits 206 each pending order into lists based on the shipment configuration required for that order, possible shipping configurations include multi-unit orders to be packed and shipped in shipping cartons 24, single unit orders to be packed and shipped in shipping cartons 24, and single unit orders to be packed and shipped in bags, known as poly bags. Multiple items for single unit items may be batched into a pick tote 26 such that the batch of single item orders may be transported to a downstream bagging subsystem which can efficiently handle the bagging process for the single item orders. The module 68a then sorts 208 each of the pending orders based on their priority within the respective configuration categories to prepare a database 70 of pending orders based on shipment configuration and priority… determining 212 which sequencing system 10 and respective sequencing tower 14 and ASRS 16 aisles have the greatest number of SKUs present that are required to fulfil that multi-unit order. The method determines 214 if there are more than one sequencing system 10 in the facility 12 that contains the same number of required SKUs.”
and assigning the order to the workstation;0049: “Continuing from FIG. 2A to FIG. 2B, using the pending order list in database 70, the method 200 includes choosing 210 the multi-unit configuration order with the highest priority from the database 70 (FIG. 2B). Then determining 212 which sequencing system 10 and respective sequencing tower 14 and ASRS 16 aisles have the greatest number of SKUs present that are required to fulfil that multi-unit order. The method determines 214 if there are more than one sequencing system 10 in the facility 12 that contains the same number of required SKUs. If not, or in other words one system 10 has more available SKUs to fulfil the order than any other system 10 in the facility, then the program assigns 216 the order to that system 10 with the highest available SKUs. If yes, more than one system 10 contains an equal number of SKUs to fulfil the order, then the program assigns 218 the order to the sequencing system 10 that has the lowest number of work timings assigned to it (i.e. the sequencing system 10 with the least amount of pending work is chosen). Once the assignments 216 and 218 are made, the multi-unit order assignments are stored in a sequencing system assignment database 72. Either concurrently with or subsequent to the multi-unit operations of steps 210-218, the program 68 then selects 220 the highest priority order from the single unit requiring a shipping container configuration from database 70 and determines 222 which sequencing systems 10 contain the SKU required to fulfil that single unit order (FIG. 2B). Continuing from FIG. 2B to FIG. 2C, the method then determines 224 if there are more than one sequencing system 10 that contains the required SKU for the single unit order. If not, or in other words only one system 10 includes the required SKU, the program assigns 226 the single unit order to that system 10 containing the required SKU. If yes, more than one system contains the required SKU, the program assigns 228 the single unit carton order to the sequencing system 10 having the lowest total shipping cartons and pick totes assigned to it (i.e. the sequencing system 10 with the greatest remaining storage/buffer capacity). Once the assignments 226 and 228 are made, the single unit requiring shipping cartons assignments are stored in the sequencing system assignment database 72.”
Lin and Puite are deemed to be analogous references as they are reasonably pertinent to each other and directed towards measuring, collecting, and analyzing information with a series of inputs to solve similar problems in the similar environments. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Lin with the aforementioned teachings from Puite with a reasonable expectation of success, by adding steps that allow the software to assign data with the motivation to more efficiently and accurately organize and analyze data [Puite 0049].
As per claim 2, Lin and Puite teach all the limitations of claim 1.
In addition, Lin teaches:
in response to detecting that the first article is part of the to-be-picked commodities in the order or in response to not detecting the first article…; 0078: “If there is a single tote that meets the order demand, the single tote is determined as the target tote of the to-be-processed order. If there is no single tote that meets the order demand, the target tote is sequentially assigned to each of the target items in the processing sequence of each of the target items of the to-be-processed order.”
detecting, based on articles in the returning turnover box, whether a second article matching the order is present in the returning turnover box; in response to detecting that the second article matching the order is present in the returning turnover box; 0065-0078: “Each of the target totes corresponds to one of the to-be-processed orders or corresponds to one target item in the order demand of one of the to-be-processed orders. In other words, each target tote may be hit by only one to-be-processed order or by one SKU or one target item in an order demand of one to-be-processed order, thereby avoiding a phenomenon that one target tote corresponds to a plurality of orders. Specifically, if a tote is hit by one of the to-be-processed orders, that is, the tote is determined as the target tote of one of the to-be-processed orders, the tote is not considered when a target tote is assigned to another to-be-processed order…Specifically, based on a quantity of target items in the order demand of the to-be-processed order, whether there is a single tote that meets the order demand may be searched from the totes stored in the warehousing system. Each of the target items required in the order demand of the to-be-processed order is stored in the tote, and a quantity of target items stored in the tote is greater than or equal to the quantity of target items in the order demand of the to-be-processed order.”
detecting whether a sum of the first article and the second article is all of the to-be-picked commodities in the order; 0078: “If there is no single tote that meets the order demand, the target tote is sequentially assigned to each of the target items in the processing sequence of each of the target items of the to-be-processed order. Alternatively, if there is no single tote that meets the order demand, the demand of the target item ranking bottom in the processing sequence in the order demand is removed, to obtain a new order demand…0116-0117: so that a sum of the second quantities of the target items stored in the group of candidate totes is greater than or equal to the demand quantity of the target items in the order demand of the target order, and a difference between the two is as small as possible… a sum of the second quantities corresponding to the candidate totes assigned to the target order is greater than or equal to the demand quantity of the target items in the order demand of the target order, thereby obtaining each of the candidate totes corresponding to each target order, and then obtaining the third quantity of the candidate totes required for each target order.”
and in response to detecting that the sum of the first article and the second article is all of the to-be-picked commodities in the order, binding the order to the returning turnover box corresponding to the second article;0065-0084: “Each of the target totes corresponds to one of the to-be-processed orders or corresponds to one target item in the order demand of one of the to-be-processed orders. In other words, each target tote may be hit by only one to-be-processed order or by one SKU or one target item in an order demand of one to-be-processed order, thereby avoiding a phenomenon that one target tote corresponds to a plurality of orders…Step S203: Generate a carrying instruction according to the target totes and the carrying sequence of each of the target totes, to control, based on the carrying instruction, a robot to carry each of the target totes.”
Lin may not explicitly teach the following. However, Puite teaches:
determining a returning turnover box assigned to the workstation, wherein the returning turnover box is being in a warehouse return shipping; 0035-0041: “Once the operator 46 has retrieved the required items from the donor tote 34, the tote 34 is discharged from the decant station 18b back to the ASRS 16 for storage… Referring to FIGS. 1-7B, the following methods, 100, 200, 300, 400, 500, 600, and 700 are provided are provided for synchronizing, balancing, and optimizing various order fulfilment processes in an order fulfilment facility 12. Method 100, as illustrated in FIGS. 1-1C, is provided for optimizing the utilization of pick stations 18a, decant stations 18b, shipping carton erectors 38, empty shipping cartons 24, empty pick totes 26, and donor totes 34 to operate the facility 12 in an efficient manner. Method 200, as illustrated in FIGS. 2-2I, is similar in many respects to method 100, while additionally optimizing sub-processes within an order fulfillment facility, including determining order configurations (e.g. multi-item orders, single-item orders, order requiring shipping containers 24, and orders requiring bags, etc.), assigning orders to a system 10 and its respective sequencing tower 14, assigning orders to pick stations 18a connected to the respective sequencing tower 14, assigning inbound items and vendor cases 28 to a system 10 and its respective sequencing tower 14, and assigning inbound items and vendor cases 28 to decant stations 18b connected to the respective sequencing tower 14. Method 300, as illustrated in FIGS. 3A-3B, is provided for sequencing and balancing flows of objects (e.g. vendor cases 28, inbound items, etc.) and containers (e.g. shipping containers 24, inventory/pick totes or receptacles 26, etc.) from the sequencing tower 14 with flows of containers (e.g. donor totes 34) from the ASRS 16. Method 400, as illustrated in FIGS. 4A-4B, is provided for sequencing and optimizing flows of inbound items (e.g. vendor cases 28) with flows of inventory containers (e.g. donor totes 34) arriving at a decant workstation 18b. Method 500, as illustrated in FIGS. 5A-5B, is provided for directing and optimizing the distribution of multiple of the same type of item, such as items having the same SKU, to various different locations within an automated warehouse facility (e.g. different ASRS aisles, for example). Method 600, as illustrated in FIG. 6, is provided for directing and optimizing the distribution of different types of items that are typically ordered together to a similar location within an automated warehouse facility. Method 700, as illustrated in FIGS. 7A-7B, is provided for directing and optimizing the receipt and offloading of inbound trailers at an automated warehouse facility. Each method will be discussed in further detail below…0062: Once picking is complete from a donor tote 34, that tote is returned to ASRS 16 for storage, and it is then available for future order fulfillment or decant operations. Once the order-fulfilment is complete for a shipping carton 24 or pick tote 26, that shipping/staging container is released to a downstream subsystem, as necessary for the next required process, such as being routed to a packing subsystem for automatic manifesting, sealing, weighing, and transportation rate pricing and labeling via a rate checking and labeling system. Once packing is complete, the order container departs from the packing subsystem to the shipping subsystem.” Examiner note: Matching, returning turnover box with donor tote 34 that is being returned; the tote is being discharged/returned to the ASRS 16 (warehouse storage).
Lin and Puite are deemed to be analogous references as they are reasonably pertinent to each other and directed towards measuring, collecting, and analyzing information with a series of inputs to solve similar problems in the similar environments. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Lin with the aforementioned teachings from Puite with a reasonable expectation of success, by adding steps that allow the software to assign data with the motivation to more efficiently and accurately organize and analyze data [Puite 0049].
As per claim 3, Lin and Puite teach all the limitations of claim 2.
In addition, Lin teaches:
in response to detecting that the sum of the first article and the second article is part of the to-be-picked commodities in the order; 0078: “ If there is no single tote that meets the order demand, the target tote is sequentially assigned to each of the target items in the processing sequence of each of the target items of the to-be-processed order. Alternatively, if there is no single tote that meets the order demand, the demand of the target item ranking bottom in the processing sequence in the order demand is removed, to obtain a new order demand…0117-0120: When a plurality of candidate totes are required to meet the demand quantity of the target items in an order demand of one target order, to avoid a case in which different target workstations correspond to the same target tote, when the to-be-processed order is assigned, a quantity of to-be-processed orders corresponding to each to-be-processed workstation is determined according to the third quantity of the candidate totes required for the demand quantity of the target items in the order demand of each to-be-processed order, and the first quantity of the candidate totes storing the target items, so that when a quantity of totes storing the target items stored in the warehousing system is small, each to-be-processed order including the target items in the order demand may be issued to one workstation or workstations whose quantity is small.”
selecting, based on a distance between an aisle and the at least one workstation and a task volume of the aisle, in the aisle a first in-warehouse turnover box corresponding to the order, and binding the first in-warehouse turnover box to the order;0041: “The tote processing device may be a dispatching device of a warehousing system, and a form of the tote processing device may be a computer or a server. A storage shelving unit 110, a robot 120, a conveyor 130, a workstation 140, and a dispatching device 150 are usually set in a warehousing system. The dispatching device 150 is configured to assign the workstation 140 to an order, and is further configured to assign totes stored on the storage shelving unit 110 to an outbound order, so that the robot 120 carries a tote corresponding to the outbound order to a conveyor 130 connected to a workstation 140 corresponding to the outbound order. The tote corresponding to the outbound order is transported, through the conveyor 130, to the workstation corresponding to the outbound order, so that goods stored in the tote are sorted through the workstation, to complete the outbound order…0060-0068, 0085: Further, if the to-be-processed order corresponds to a plurality of adapted workstations, a nearest adapted workstation may be further determined as the target workstation of the to-be-processed order based on a distance between an area in which the tote of each of the target items in the order demand of the to-be-processed order is stored and each of the adapted workstations… An order demand of a to-be-processed order D2 is ten pieces of clothes C1 in size S, eight pieces of clothes C1 in size M, and 12 pieces of clothes C1 in size L. Processing sequences of the clothes in the to-be-processed order D1 and the to-be-processed order D2 is L, M, and S, so that when being put on the shelves, the clothes may be directly put on the shelves based on a sequence when the clothes are retrieved, thereby avoiding a step of manual tallying, and improving efficiency of goods placement.”
As per claim 4, Lin and Puite teach all the limitations of claim 2.
In addition, Lin teaches:
in response to not detecting the first article and the second article, scoring a commodity corresponding to the order in the at least one workstation to obtain an order score corresponding to the at least one workstation; 0043-0053: “In some embodiments, only goods with one SKU (Stock Keeping Unit) or only goods of one type may be stored in one tote…Step S301: Count target items corresponding to an order demand of each to-be-processed order…Because there is a limitation on a processing sequence of the outbound order, various items need to be sequentially sorted in the processing sequence. If the same tote is hit by the demands of the plurality of SKUs of one outbound order, and a processing sequence corresponding to the demands of the plurality of SKUs that are hit is not continuous, the tote travels between the workstation of the outbound order and the storage shelving unit a plurality of times. In addition, due to a requirement for the processing sequence, processing of the outbound order is interrupted. This reduces processing efficiency of the outbound order.”
determining, based on the order score, a first workstation satisfying the order in the at least one workstation; assigning the order to the first workstation; 0049-0051: “Because there is a limitation on a processing sequence of the outbound order, various items need to be sequentially sorted in the processing sequence. If the same tote is hit by the demands of the plurality of SKUs of one outbound order, and a processing sequence corresponding to the demands of the plurality of SKUs that are hit is not continuous, the tote travels between the workstation of the outbound order and the storage shelving unit a plurality of times. In addition, due to a requirement for the processing sequence, processing of the outbound order is interrupted. This reduces processing efficiency of the outbound order… To improve the processing efficiency of the outbound order, an embodiment of this application provides a tote processing method. A main concept of the method is: For a plurality of to-be-processed orders received by the target workstation, target totes and a carrying sequence of each of the target totes are determined based on the order demand of each to-be-processed order and the processing sequence corresponding to each to-be-processed order, thereby ensuring that the robot places, in the carrying sequence, each of the target tote on the target workstation or a conveyor connected to the target workstation, so that each to-be-processed order is continuously executed, and the order processing efficiency is improved.”
Lin may not explicitly teach the following. However, Puite teaches:
and selecting, based on a distance between an aisle and the first workstation and a task volume of the aisle, in the aisle a second in-warehouse turnover box corresponding to the order, and binding the second in-warehouse turnover box to the order; 0051: “Continuing from FIG. 2D to FIG. 2E, the method 200 carried out by program 68, either concurrent with or subsequent to steps 202-238, selects 240 a first sequencing system 10 that is active in the facility 12 from database 72 and then selects 242 the multi-unit order with the highest priority that is assigned to the selected sequencing system 10 and determines 244 which aisle of the ASRS 16 corresponding to the selected system 10 contains the largest number of required SKUs to fulfil the selected multi-unit order. The program then determines 244 if there are two or more aisles of the ASRS that contain an equally high number of required SKUs to fulfil the order. If not, or in other words only one aisle contains a highest number of required SKUs, then the program assigns 248 the selected multi-unit order to the pick station 18a that corresponds to the aisle of the ASRS 16 with the highest number of required SKUs. If yes, more than one aisle contains an equally high number of required SKUs, the program assigns 250 the selected multi-unit order to the pick station 18a that has the lowest number of work timings assigned to it (i.e. the pick station 18a with the least amount of pending work is chosen). For example, in a system 10 that is in direct communication with four ASRS aisles and the system 10 includes two pick stations 18a each in direct communication with only two of those four ASRS aisles, if one of the four aisles contains two SKUs required for the selected multi-unit order and each of the other four aisles contain only one SKU required for that order, the program assigns 248 the selected multi-unit order to the pick station 18a that corresponds to the ASRS aisle that contains the two required SKUs. For another example, in a system 10 that is in direct communication with four ASRS aisles and the system 10 includes two pick stations 18a each in direct communication with only two of those four ASRS aisles, if a multi-unit order requires four SKUs and one of the two aisles corresponding to the first pick station 18a contains two of the required SKUs and one of the two aisles corresponding to the second pick station 18a contains two of the required SKUs, the program assigns 250 the selected multi-unit order to the pick station 18a having the lowest amount of pending work. Once the assignments 248 and 250 are made, the multi-unit order assignments per pick station 18a are stored in a pick station assignment database 82.”
Lin and Puite are deemed to be analogous references as they are reasonably pertinent to each other and directed towards measuring, collecting, and analyzing information with a series of inputs to solve similar problems in the similar environments. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Lin with the aforementioned teachings from Puite with a reasonable expectation of success, by adding steps that allow the software to assign data with the motivation to more efficiently and accurately organize and analyze data [Puite 0049].
As per claim 5, Lin and Puite teach all the limitations of claim 2.
In addition, Lin teaches:
scoring a distance of same articles in the at least one workstation as the to-be- picked commodities in the order, to obtain a distance score; Lin 0060-0061: “Further, if the to-be-processed order corresponds to a plurality of adapted workstations, a nearest adapted workstation may be further determined as the target workstation of the to-be-processed order based on a distance between an area in which the tote of each of the target items in the order demand of the to-be-processed order is stored and each of the adapted workstations. Further, if the to-be-processed order corresponds to the plurality of adapted workstations, the target workstation of the to-be-processed order may be further determined from the plurality of adapted workstations based on the distance between the area in which the tote storing the target items in the order demand of the to-be-processed order is located and each adapted workstation, and an order priority of the to-be-processed order.
Lin may not explicitly teach the following. However, Puite teaches:
scoring a number of types of same articles in the at least one workstation as the to-be-picked commodities in the order, to obtain a type score; 0049: “Continuing from FIG. 2A to FIG. 2B, using the pending order list in database 70, the method 200 includes choosing 210 the multi-unit configuration order with the highest priority from the database 70 (FIG. 2B). Then determining 212 which sequencing system 10 and respective sequencing tower 14 and ASRS 16 aisles have the greatest number of SKUs present that are required to fulfil that multi-unit order. The method determines 214 if there are more than one sequencing system 10 in the facility 12 that contains the same number of required SKUs. If not, or in other words one system 10 has more available SKUs to fulfil the order than any other system 10 in the facility, then the program assigns 216 the order to that system 10 with the highest available SKUs. If yes, more than one system 10 contains an equal number of SKUs to fulfil the order, then the program assigns 218 the order to the sequencing system 10 that has the lowest number of work timings assigned to it (i.e. the sequencing system 10 with the least amount of pending work is chosen).”
and obtaining the order score based on the type score and the distance score; 0049: “ If yes, more than one system 10 contains an equal number of SKUs to fulfil the order, then the program assigns 218 the order to the sequencing system 10 that has the lowest number of work timings assigned to it (i.e. the sequencing system 10 with the least amount of pending work is chosen). Once the assignments 216 and 218 are made, the multi-unit order assignments are stored in a sequencing system assignment database 72. Either concurrently with or subsequent to the multi-unit operations of steps 210-218, the program 68 then selects 220 the highest priority order from the single unit requiring a shipping container configuration from database 70 and determines 222 which sequencing systems 10 contain the SKU required to fulfil that single unit order (FIG. 2B). Continuing from FIG. 2B to FIG. 2C, the method then determines 224 if there are more than one sequencing system 10 that contains the required SKU for the single unit order. If not, or in other words only one system 10 includes the required SKU, the program assigns 226 the single unit order to that system 10 containing the required SKU. If yes, more than one system contains the required SKU, the program assigns 228 the single unit carton order to the sequencing system 10 having the lowest total shipping cartons and pick totes assigned to it (i.e. the sequencing system 10 with the greatest remaining storage/buffer capacity). Once the assignments 226 and 228 are made, the single unit requiring shipping cartons assignments are stored in the sequencing system assignment database 72.”
Lin and Puite are deemed to be analogous references as they are reasonably pertinent to each other and directed towards measuring, collecting, and analyzing information with a series of inputs to solve similar problems in the similar environments. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Lin with the aforementioned teachings from Puite with a reasonable expectation of success, by adding steps that allow the software to assign data with the motivation to more efficiently and accurately organize and analyze data [Puite 0049].
As per claim 6, Lin and Puite teach all the limitations of claim 5.
In addition, Lin teaches:
calculating a ratio of a number of types of articles, same as the to-be-picked commodities in the order, in the turnover box and the in-warehouse turnover box bound to each workstation in the at least one workstation, same as the to-be-picked commodities in the order, to the number of types of the to-be-picked commodities in the order, to obtain an order sub-score; 0118: “Specifically, for each of the target items, the third quantity of the candidate totes storing the target items that need to be retrieved in each target order is determined according to a ratio of the second quantity of the target items stored in each of the candidate totes storing the target items to the demand quantity of the target items in the order demand of each target order…0202: Optionally, the order assignment module is specifically configured to: count target items corresponding to the order demand of each to-be-processed order; for each of the target items, obtain a first quantity of candidate totes corresponding to the target items, where the candidate tote is a tote in a warehousing system in which the target items are stored and does not correspond to any order; and determine, according to the first quantity of the candidate totes corresponding to the target items and the order demand of each to-be-processed order, the to-be-processed order corresponding to each target workstation, to enable a quantity of target workstations corresponding to the target items to be less than or equal to the first quantity of the candidate totes corresponding to the target items.”
Lin may not explicitly teach the following. However, Puite teaches:
calculating a ratio of a number of types of articles, same as the to-be-picked commodities in the order, in an aisle where the in-warehouse turnover box bound to each workstation in the at least one workstation is located to the number of types of the to-be-picked commodities in the order, to obtain an aisle sub-score; 0051-0052: “Continuing from FIG. 2D to FIG. 2E, the method 200 carried out by program 68, either concurrent with or subsequent to steps 202-238, selects 240 a first sequencing system 10 that is active in the facility 12 from database 72 and then selects 242 the multi-unit order with the highest priority that is assigned to the selected sequencing system 10 and determines 244 which aisle of the ASRS 16 corresponding to the selected system 10 contains the largest number of required SKUs to fulfil the selected multi-unit order…Either concurrently with or subsequent to the multi-unit operations of steps 242-250, the program 68 selects 252 the single unit order requiring a shipping carton with the highest priority that is assigned to the selected sequencing system 10 and determines 254 which aisle of the ASRS 16 corresponding to the selected system 10 contains the required SKU to fulfil the selected single unit carton order (FIG. 2E). Continuing from FIG. 2E to FIG. 2F, the program then determines 256 if there are two or more aisles of the ASRS 16 corresponding to the selected system 10 that contain the required SKU to fulfil the single unit carton order. If not, or in other words if only one aisle contains the required SKU, then the program assigns 258 the selected single unit carton order to the pick station 18a that corresponds to the aisle of the ASRS 16 with the required SKU.”
and obtaining the type score based on the order sub-score and the aisle sub-score; 0049-0051: “Continuing from FIG. 2A to FIG. 2B, using the pending order list in database 70, the method 200 includes choosing 210 the multi-unit configuration order with the highest priority from the database 70 (FIG. 2B). Then determining 212 which sequencing system 10 and respective sequencing tower 14 and ASRS 16 aisles have the greatest number of SKUs present that are required to fulfil that multi-unit order. The method determines 214 if there are more than one sequencing system 10 in the facility 12 that contains the same number of required SKUs. If not, or in other words one system 10 has more available SKUs to fulfil the order than any other system 10 in the facility, then the program assigns 216 the order to that system 10 with the highest available SKUs…The program then determines 244 if there are two or more aisles of the ASRS that contain an equally high number of required SKUs to fulfil the order. If not, or in other words only one aisle contains a highest number of required SKUs, then the program assigns 248 the selected multi-unit order to the pick station 18a that corresponds to the aisle of the ASRS 16 with the highest number of required SKUs. If yes, more than one aisle contains an equally high number of required SKUs, the program assigns 250 the selected multi-unit order to the pick station 18a that has the lowest number of work timings assigned to it (i.e. the pick station 18a with the least amount of pending work is chosen). For example, in a system 10 that is in direct communication with four ASRS aisles and the system 10 includes two pick stations 18a each in direct communication with only two of those four ASRS aisles, if one of the four aisles contains two SKUs required for the selected multi-unit order and each of the other four aisles contain only one SKU required for that order, the program assigns 248 the selected multi-unit order to the pick station 18a that corresponds to the ASRS aisle that contains the two required SKUs.”
Lin and Puite are deemed to be analogous references as they are reasonably pertinent to each other and directed towards measuring, collecting, and analyzing information with a series of inputs to solve similar problems in the similar environments. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Lin with the aforementioned teachings from Puite with a reasonable expectation of success, by adding steps that allow the software to assign data with the motivation to more efficiently and accurately organize and analyze data [Puite 0049].
As per claim 7, Lin and Puite teach all the limitations of claim 4.
In addition, Lin teaches:
in response to a historical pooled order being of a same type as the order and orders in the historical pooled order not reaching a preset number of orders, adding the order to the historical pooled order; 0127-0130: “Step S501: Combine each to-be-processed order according to each of the target items corresponding to each to-be-processed order and a sequence of each of the target items in a corresponding processing sequence, to obtain a combined order. Specifically, each to-be-processed order that meets a combination condition in each to-be-processed order may be combined into one combined order. [0129] In some embodiments, each to-be-processed order that meets the combination condition may be each to-be-processed order that requires target items with the same types or SKUs in the order demand. [0130] In some embodiments, each to-be-processed order that meets the combination condition may be each to-be-processed order in which the types of the target items are the same, and a processing sequence corresponding to each to-be-processed order is the same in the order demand. That is, only a parameter, namely, the demand quantity, in the order demand of each to-be-processed order in the combined order is different…0160: Optionally, when a quantity of target totes in a tote group corresponding to the to-be-processed order is less than a first preset quantity, a target tote corresponding to a next to-be-processed order may be further added to the tote group, which specifically is: combining each of the target totes in at least one next to-be-processed order with the tote group of the to-be-processed order in the carrying sequence of the each of the target totes, to enable the quantity of target totes in the tote group of the to-be-processed order to be in a first interval, where a lower limit of the first interval is the first preset quantity, and an upper limit of the first interval is a second preset quantity.”
Lin may not explicitly teach the following. However, Puite teaches:
and in response to the historical pooled order not being of a same type as the order, determining a type of the order, and assigning a corresponding slot in the first workstation for the type of the order, recording a volume of the slot and an upper limit of the slot on the number of orders; 0047-0048: “Referring to FIGS. 2-2I, the computer system 13 includes a program 68 that carries out method 200, which is similar in many respects to method 100 described above, and which is also provided for optimizing sub-processes within an order fulfillment facility, including determining order configurations (e.g. multi-item orders, single-item orders, order requiring shipping containers 24, and orders requiring bags, etc.), assigning orders to a sequencing system 10 and its respective sequencing tower 14, assigning orders to pick stations 18a connected to the respective sequencing tower 14, assigning inbound items and vendor cases 28 to a system 10 and its respective sequencing tower 14, and/or assigning inbound items and vendor cases 28 to decant stations 18b connected to the respective sequencing tower 14… Method 200, as carried out by program 68, includes a module 68a for determining work timings for pending orders and preparing a list of pending orders that is categorized by the configuration of the order (FIG. 2A). The module 68a assumes 202 a default work rate timing number based on a database 50 of initial or starting work timing numbers. The program 68 then uses production data to calculate 204 a work timing number for each pending order. Calculating 204 the work timing number may be carried out continuously to provide real-time work timing numbers for each order. The module 68a splits 206 each pending order into lists based on the shipment configuration required for that order, possible shipping configurations include multi-unit orders to be packed and shipped in shipping cartons 24…0054-0055: Referring to FIGS. 2H-2I, the program 68 includes a module 68b to carry out a portion of method 200. Module 68b is provided for optimally assigning or slotting inbound items to sequencing systems 10, decant stations 18b, and aisles of the ASRS 16 and for creating a consolidated list 80 of work timings, expected order delivery times, and expected order departure times for all inbound items (vendor cases 28), empty shipping cartons 24, and empty pick totes 26 in the facility.
Lin and Puite are deemed to be analogous references as they are reasonably pertinent to each other and directed towards measuring, collecting, and analyzing information with a series of inputs to solve similar problems in the similar environments. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Lin with the aforementioned teachings from Puite with a reasonable expectation of success, by adding steps that allow the software to assign data with the motivation to more efficiently and accurately organize and analyze data [Puite 0049].
Claim 8-9 and 11-20 are directed to the apparatus and CRM for performing the method of claims 1-7 above. Since Lin and Puite teach the apparatus CRM, the same art and rationale apply.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Avery, JR.; William L.. Systems, Methods, And Media For Managing Inventory Associated With A Facility, .U.S. PGPub 20200364662 Accordingly, new systems, methods, and media for managing inventory associated with a facility are desirable.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Arif Ullah, whose telephone number is (571) 270-0161. The examiner can normally be reached from Monday to Friday between 9 AM and 5:30 PM.
If any attempt to reach the examiner by telephone is unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Beth Boswell, can be reached at (571) 272-6737. The fax telephone numbers for this group are either (571) 273-8300 or (703) 872-9326 (for official communications including After Final communications labeled “Box AF”)./Arif Ullah/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3625