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 .
Claim Objections
Applicant is advised that should claim 39 be found allowable, claim 44 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
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) 21-23, 25-27, 39-33, 37-41, 43, and 44 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2565452 in view of DE 102015001540 .
Regarding claim 21, JP ‘452 teaches a bin exchange system comprising:
a shelf, 13, at having an elevated position with respect to a planar work surface, 2, the shelf having at least two tine supports, 13a, upon which one of the plurality of containers is deposited by the infeed conveyor; and
an automated carrier, 1, being remotely controlled to move about the planar work surface, the automated carriers having a container support surface, 4, the automated carrier having a height that is less than the height of the elevated position of the shelf, see figures 8-11; and the automated carrier including at least one actuatable paddle, 6, the at least one actuatable paddle extendable to capture the one of the plurality of containers deposited on the shelf as the automated carrier exits from under the shelf, see figures 8-11.
JP ‘452 teaches the shelf and automated carrier, but does not teach the infeed conveyor. DE ‘540 teaches an infeed conveyor, 1, for the induction of a plurality of containers into an object processing system, the object processing system including a planar work surface, the infeed conveyor having an elevated position with respect to the planar work surface, see figure 1A.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to combine the infeed conveyor of DE ‘540 with the shelf and automated carrier of JP ‘452 in order to enable the containers to move from the shelf for further processing by the system.
Regarding claim 22, DE ‘540 teaches the infeed conveyor is a gravity conveyor, see figure 1A.
Regarding claim 23, JP ‘452 does not teach the shelf has four tine supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to add additional tine supports for a total of four tine supports in order to improve the stability of the container being supported on the shelf since it has been held that mere duplication of the working parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960).
Regarding claim 25, JP ‘452 teaches the automated carrier includes at least one centering plate, 5, for further containing the one of the plurality of containers captured thereon.
Regarding claim 26, JP ‘452 teaches the planar work surface comprises an array of raised track sections, 3, mounted thereon, and one of the array of raised track sections is disposed under the shelf.
Regarding claim 27, JP ‘452 teaches the automated carrier includes a pair of mutually opposing actuatable wheels, see figure 1 and 6.
Regarding claim 29, JP ‘452 teaches a bin exchange system comprising:
an automated carrier, 1, being remotely controlled to move about a planar work surface, 2, the automated carriers having a container support surface, 4;
a container, W, positioned on the container support surface of the automated carrier; and
a shelf, 13, having an elevated position with respect to the planar work surface, 2, the shelf having at least two tine supports, 13a, the at least two tine supports having an angled front portion, 13b;
the automated carrier, 1, including at least one actuatable paddle, 6, the at least one actuatable paddle extendable to capture the container as the automated carrier drives under the shelf and at least partially under the infeed conveyor, see figures 8-11.
JP ‘452 teaches the shelf and automated carrier, but does not teach the infeed conveyor. DE ‘540 teaches an infeed conveyor, 1, for an object processing system that includes a planar work surface, the infeed conveyor having an elevated position with respect to the planar work surface, see figure 1A.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to combine the infeed conveyor of DE ‘540 with the shelf and automated carrier of JP ‘452 in order to enable the containers to move from the shelf for further processing by the system.
Regarding claim 30, DE ‘540 teaches the infeed conveyor is a gravity conveyor, see figure 1A.
Regarding claim 31, JP ‘452 does not teach the shelf has four tine supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to add additional tine supports for a total of four tine supports in order to improve the stability of the container being supported on the shelf since it has been held that mere duplication of the working parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960).
Regarding claim 32, JP ‘452 teaches the automated carrier includes at least one centering plate, 5, for further containing the one of the plurality of containers captured thereon.
Regarding claim 33, JP ‘452 teaches the automated carrier includes a pair of mutually opposing actuatable wheels, see figure 1 and 6.
Regarding claim 37, JP ‘452 teaches a bin exchange system comprising:
a shelf, 13, having an elevated position with respect to a planar work surface, 2, substantially, the shelf having at least two tine supports, 13a; and
an automated carrier, 1, being remotely controlled to move about the planar work surface, 2, the automated carriers having a container support surface, 4, the automated carrier having a height that is less than the height of the elevated position of the shelf, see figures 8-11, and the automated carrier including at least one actuatable paddle, 6, the at least one actuatable paddle being extendable to capture the container as the automated carrier enters under the shelf or exits from under the shelf, see figures 8-11.
JP ‘452 teaches the shelf and automated carrier, but does not teach the infeed conveyor. DE ‘540 teaches an infeed conveyor, 1, for the induction of a container into and discharged from an object processing system that includes a planar work surface, the infeed conveyor having an elevated position with respect to the planar work surface, see figure 1A.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to combine the infeed conveyor of DE ‘540 with the shelf and automated carrier of JP ‘452 in order to enable the containers to move from the shelf for further processing by the system.
Regarding claim 38, DE ‘540 teaches the infeed conveyor is a gravity conveyor, see figure 1A.
Regarding claim 39 and 44, JP ‘452 teaches the planar work surface comprises an array of raised track sections, 3, mounted thereon, and one of the array of raised track sections is disposed under the shelf.
Regarding claim 40, JP ‘452 teaches the automated carrier includes a pair of mutually opposing actuatable wheels, see figure 1 and 6.
Regarding claim 41, JP ‘452 does not teach the shelf has four tine supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to add additional tine supports for a total of four tine supports in order to improve the stability of the container being supported on the shelf since it has been held that mere duplication of the working parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960)
Regarding claim 43, JP ‘452 teaches the automated carrier includes at least one centering plate, 5, for further containing the one of the plurality of containers captured thereon.
Claim(s) 24, 34, 35, 36 and 42 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2565452 in view of DE 102015001540 as applied to claims 21 and 29 above, and further in view of US 4,508, 484.
Regarding claims 24, 34, and 42 neither JP ‘452 nor DE ‘540 teaches an inclined belt conveyor between the infeed conveyor and the shelf.
US ‘484 teaches a bin exchange system including an inclined belt, 8, and an infeed conveyor, 25, and an automated carrier, 2, where the infeed conveyor feeds container from the automated carrier to onto the infeed conveyor, see figures 3 and 4.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to combine the inclined belt of US ‘484 with the system taught by the combination of JP’ 452 and DE ‘540 in order to achieve the predictable result of assisting in moving containers from the shelf onto the infeed conveyor and further into the processing system.
Regarding claims 35 and 36, JP ‘452 teaches the planar work surface comprises an array of raised track sections, 3, mounted thereon, and one of the array of raised track sections is disposed under the shelf.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Prior art cited on the PTO-892 and not relied upon are included to show the general state of the prior art.
US 2018/0186572 and US 2017/0152106 teaches automated carriers, 20, that interact with shelves, 52, in a bin exchanges system where the shelves and carriers have tines.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAITLIN S JOERGER whose telephone number is (571)272-6938. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5 (CST).
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, Ernesto Suarez can be reached at (571)270-5565. 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.
/KAITLIN S JOERGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3655
18 June 2026
Prosecution Insights