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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 14 refers back to claim 11 as if it is a dependent claim. Claim 14 however is written as an independent claim but refers back to claim 11 as a dependent claim does. The claims appear to be a literal translation from a foreign document and does not conform to normal U.S. practice. If applicant intends to incorporate the autonomous mobile device of claim 11, the proper way to do so is to include the limitations in claim 11 without reference to claim 11. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 19-20 claim a method but do not disclose any method steps. In addition it is unclear whether claim 19 is an independent claim or a dependent claim as it refers back to a previous claim and would appear to be claiming two different statutory classes in referring back to claim 14. Hence the claims have not been treated as it relates to prior art. Appropriate correction is required.
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) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2017/0066592 to Bastian, II et al.(hereinafter “Bastian”).
Bastian discloses (claim 11) an autonomously mobile device 1200/2400 for loading items including a first autonomously mobile carriage 1202 on which a robotic arm 1216 for moving at least one bobbin is mounted, the first autonomously mobile carriage 1202 further comprising a control unit PC/PLC, autonomous movement means 1206 controlled by the control unit PC/PLC, and an electrical energy storage device 2006, the autonomous movement means 1206 and the robotic arm 1216 of the first autonomously mobile carriage 1202 being supplied with electrical energy by the electrical energy storage device 2006 of the first autonomously mobile carriage 1202, wherein the first autonomously mobile carriage 1202 further comprises means 3002 for electrically recharging the electrical energy storage device by mechanical friction contacts or contactlessly by electromagnetic induction (para [0090]).
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) 12 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bastion (US 2017/066592) in view of US 2018/0141755 to Khodl et al.
With regard to claims 12 and 13, Bastion includes all the claimed features but does not disclose a second autonomously mobile carriage on which a supply rack is mounted. Khodi et al. discloses an autonomously mobile device 114 having a robot arm 24 including a second autonomously mobile carriage 14 on which a supply rack is mounted (figure 4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to include the second mobile carriage of Khodi et al. to facilitate picking and putting functions carried out automatically without human intervention as taught by Khodl et al.
Claim(s) 14-18 is/are rejected, as best understood, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over USP 5,329,962 to Ohnishi et al in view of USP 9,902,276 to Bianco et al.
With regard to claim 14, Ohnishi et al. discloses an autonomously mobile device 300 having a robot arm 301 but does not disclose a means for electrically recharging contacts of the mobile device including an arm for connection to an electrical supply rail. Bianco et al. discloses a means for electrically recharging contacts of the mobile device including an arm 70 for connection to an electrical supply rail 30 (figure 6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to include the recharging means of Bianca et al. to allow for charging of the autonomously mobile devices such requiring including a known method/device for recharging the battery powered vehicles.
With regard to claim 15, the combined teachings of Ohnishi et al. and Bianco teach at least one aisle on either side of a facility. The location of the electrical supply rails would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention as a design choice and expedient as one skilled in the art would put electrical supply rails where ever they are deemed useful.
With regard to claims 16-18, Ohnishi et al. discloses the manufacturing facility including at least one weaving machine 10, a feed rack 1 enables the at least one weaving machine 10 to receive bobbins for feeding threads to manufacture a textile product from the threads (figure 16), the facility capable of producing a textile product manufactured by the at least one weaving machine is used for manufacturing a rubber product reinforced with the textile product.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GENE O CRAWFORD whose telephone number is (571)272-6911. The examiner can normally be reached M-Thurs 6a-5p; Fri 6a-2p.
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, Joseph Thomas can be reached at 571-272-8002. 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.
/GENE O CRAWFORD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3651
Prosecution Insights