Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 15, 2026
Application No. 18/874,445

CONTAINER HANDLING VEHICLE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Dec 12, 2024
Priority
Jun 29, 2022 — NO 20220737 +1 more
Examiner
ADAMS, GREGORY W
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
AutoStore Technology A/S
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
8m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allowance Rate
1053 granted / 1401 resolved
+15.2% vs TC avg
Strong +24% interview lift
Without
With
+23.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
28 currently pending
Career history
1420
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
61.5%
+21.5% vs TC avg
§102
13.8%
-26.2% vs TC avg
§112
19.0%
-21.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1401 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 § 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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. Claim(s) 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 26, 27, 28, 29, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 & 38 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Austrheim (US 2020/0307911) in view of Borders (US 2020/0207546). With respect to claims 20, 24, 29 & 35-38, Austrheim discloses- a vehicle frame 13; a base (unlabeled but shown as element to which wheels 14, 15 are attached in FIG. 5); a cavity 21, e.g. internal space, defined by a vehicle frame and a base, a storage section for storing two storage containers; a lifting device 18A comprising a vertically moveable lifting frame 18A for releasably connecting to a storage container; and an opening defined by vehicle frame and base) but allowing vertical passage of a vertically moveable lifting frame between an internal space and a position below a base; wherein a lifting device is configured to be horizontally moveable between a position above an opening and a position above a storage section. Austrheim discloses an internal space that supports placement of two containers in a side-by-side arrangement. Austrheim does not disclose a base providing a storage section upon which two storage containers stacked on top of each other may be supported. Borders discloses a vehicle frame 20, a base 26, a cavity and a trolley-supported, e.g. gantry-supported, lifting device 16, 146 that moves containers 18 within an internal space that is defined by a vehicle frame and a base, wherein a base provides a storage section upon which two storage containers 18, 18 (FIGS. 1& 9) stacked on top of each other may be supported. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Austrheim to include a base that provides a storage section upon which two storage containers stacked on top of each other may be supported, as taught by Borders, which allows automatically guided container handling vehicles to place container to warehouse shelving or remove containers thereon without custom-built infrastructure within the warehouse. With respect to claims 21 & 28, Austrheim discloses a plurality of storage sections 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 including first, second and third storage sections, and wherein a lifting device is configured to be horizontally moveable between a position above an opening and a position above any one a plurality of storage sections. With respect to claims 22 & 23, Austrheim discloses a first and second storage sections arranged in an X-Y grid 4 (FIG. 1), wherein a lifting device is configured to be moveable in a first horizontal direction (X-direction) between a position above an opening to a first position above a first storage section and in a second horizontal direction (perpendicularly, Y-direction) between a position above an opening to a second position above a second storage section. With respect to claims 26 & 27, Austrheim does not disclose a trolley or a gantry element. Borders discloses an XYZ-type gantry (FIG. 3; paras. 64-66), e.g. trolley, connected at an upper portion of a container handling vehicle, such that a trolley may move in a second horizontal direction relative to a base, a second horizontal direction being perpendicular to a first horizontal direction. Wherein a trolley is moveably connected to a gantry element at an upper portion of a container handling vehicle, a gantry element being moveably connected to an upper portion of a container handling vehicle, such that a gantry element and a trolley may move in a second horizontal direction relative to a base. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Austrheim to include a trolley and a gantry element, as taught by Borders, which allows automatically guided container handling vehicles to place container to warehouse shelving or remove containers thereon without custom-built infrastructure within the warehouse. With respect to claims 31, 33 & 34, Austrheim discloses a container handling vehicle that moves two perpendicular horizontal directions on a rail system, wherein a rail system comprises a first set of parallel rails 10 and a second set of parallel rails 11 arranged perpendicular to a first set of parallel rails, a container handling vehicle comprising a wheel assembly 14, 15 configured for moving a container handling vehicle along any of a first set of parallel rails and a second set of parallel rails, a wheel assembly comprising at least four wheels. With respect to claim 32, Austrheim discloses a base (the bottom of the unlabeled element in FIG. 13) arranged at a level below an upper level of four wheels 14, 15. Claim(s) 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Austrheim in view of Borders and further in view of Lindbo (US 9,682,822). Austrheim does not disclose vertical guides, Lindbo discloses vertical guide profiles 116 (C14/L10-30) extending from a base, vertical guide profiles are arranged at two corner positions of a storage section and are configured to prevent horizontal movement of a storage container supported upon the at least one storage section. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Austrheim to include vertical guide profiles, as taught by Lindbo, to guard against horizontal movement of containers as they are lifted. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 25 is 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 Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY W ADAMS whose telephone number is (571)272-8101. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri, 8am-5pm. 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, Saul Rodriguez can be reached at (571)272-7097. 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. /GREGORY W ADAMS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 12, 2024
Application Filed
Jul 14, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12707618
FEEDER SETUP DEVICE AND FEEDER SETUP SYSTEM
2y 7m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12686132
PICK AND PLACE DEVICE, PICK AND PLACE METHOD AND BATTERY PRODUCTION LINE
1y 10m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12686573
BLISTER PACKAGE STACKER
1y 6m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12686572
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR BUILDING PALLETED GOODS
1y 3m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12677747
Bale Stacker
2y 8m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
75%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+23.8%)
2y 4m (~8m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1401 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month