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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)as being anticipated by Usami Makoto (U.S. Patent ‘280).
PNG
media_image1.png
698
444
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Usami discloses (Figure 5(a)) a transport apparatus for transporting a container having an opening in a side surface (Figure 5(a) 82A) thereof through which a target object is removed or inserted, the transport apparatus comprising: a holding device (Figure 5(a) 26A) comprising a plurality of holding members and a drive device configured to move the plurality of holding members to a holding position for holding the container and a holding release position for releasing the container; and a restricting device (Figure 5(a) 26A) configured to restrict the target object from exiting the container through the opening while the container is held by the holding device, wherein the restricting device comprises at least one closing member movable to a closed position, in which the at least one closing member overlaps the opening as viewed in a removal-insertion direction in which the target object is inserted into and removed from the container through the opening, and an open position, in which the at least one closing member does not overlap the opening as viewed in the removal-insertion direction, and wherein the at least one closing member (Figure 5(a) 29A) is movable in conjunction with the movement of the holding members (Figure 5(a) 30A) such that the at least one closing member moves to the closed position in accordance with the holding members moving to the holding position, and the at least one closing member moves to the open position in accordance with the holding members moving to the holding release position. Usami discloses the container is not limited to one configuration, in Figure 5(a) (annotated in blue text) lateral portions are construed as being the holding members’ portions. The longitudinal portions of Usami in Figure 5(a) (annotated in red text) are construed as being the closing members’ portions to restrict the target object from existing the container.
Regarding claim 2, Usami discloses (Figure 5(a), 5(b), 5(c)) discloses the transport apparatus according to claim 1, wherein: the container comprises a plurality of slots arranged in an up-down direction (Figure 5(a) 82A), the target object comprises a tray placeable in any of the slots and a plurality of articles mounted on the tray, and a region of the opening which region the at least one closing member does not cover in the closed position has, as viewed in the removal-insertion direction, a smaller dimension in a width direction orthogonal to the up-down direction and the removal-insertion direction than a dimension of the articles in the width direction.
Regarding claim 3, Usami discloses(Figure (a), 5(b), 5(c)) the transport apparatus according to claim 1, wherein: the container comprises a plurality of slots arranged in an up-down direction (Figure 5(a) 82A), the target object is placeable in any of the plurality of slots, and the at least one closing member (Figure 5(a) 26A) comprises a plate-shaped portion disposed in such a manner as to overlap all of the plurality of slots as viewed in the removal-insertion direction and face the opening in the closed position.
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 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Usami Makoto (U.S. Patent '280), in view of Chen et al. (U.S. Patent '560).
Regarding claim 7, Usami teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above except the transport apparatus having a closing member with a wireless tag reader configured to read a wireless tag on the container.
On the other hand, Chen et al. teaches the carrier (200) has an identification tag of a barcode or radio frequency identification (RFID) (page 5, 0047).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Makoto in view of Chen et al. to include a wireless tag reader on the transport apparatus’s closing member to read a wireless tag on the container. Doing so would enable the transport apparatus to be able to read and identify relevant content in the container.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-6 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.
Hyobu (DE ‘349) and Wada (US ‘158) disclose other transport apparatuses with different configurations with holding and restricting members.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Elia Ahadi whose telephone number is (571) 270-3145. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:30 AM - 5:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Saul Rodriguez can be reached on (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.
/SAUL RODRIGUEZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3652
/ELIA AHADI/
Examiner, Art Unit 3652
Prosecution Insights