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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the climbing means configured to engage with climbing elements of the uprights of the storage racks facing said vertical circulation column , the engagement member of the maintenance vehicle being configured to cooperate with said climbing elements of the uprights(claim 13) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
The following limitations in claim 13 listed below have been identified as means plus function limitations with their corresponding structure from the subject specification. “climbing means”- claim 13 line 8 (motorized gear wheel).
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claim 3-9 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as failing to set forth 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.
Regarding claim 3 line 2;
claim 5, lines 3,4;
claim 7, line 2;
claim 8, line 2;
claim 9, line 2, the use of “in particular”, “for example”, and “preferable” is indefinite in a claim because it is not clear if what follows that term is, or is not, a required limitation of the claim, thus rendering the scope of the claim unclear.
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.
Claim(s) 1-8,12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zombori(US 20170121110 A1) in view of Bellheimer (DE 20103565 U1).
Regarding claim 1, Zombori discloses a vehicle (4) for a storage and retrieval system (para 0001) comprising storage racks (2) ,the storage racks comprising vertical uprights(1) , wherein the vehicle comprises: - a chassis(see fig below) able to move on a floor(para 0035-0037), a platform (see fig below) coupled to the chassis - a guardrail (12) mounted on the platform , - an ascent and descent system (para 0031) comprising an engagement member (13) configured to cooperate with the uprights (para 0031, 1) so as to drive the ascent and descent of the vehicle in a vertical direction.
Zombori does not disclose the platform receives an operator. However, Bellheimer discloses a vehicle(fig 1) wherein the platform(3) is intended to receive an operator(15). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zombori such that the vehicle can accommodate a passenger to provide instantaneous analysis/solutions to mechanical issues.
PNG
media_image1.png
769
748
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Zombori discloses wherein the engagement member comprises gear wheels(13a, para 0036 discloses a toothed lifting element), each gear wheel being configured to mesh with a climbing element extending along the height of an upright (para 0031) .
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Zombori in view of Bellheimer discloses wherein the engagement member, in particular the gear wheels of the maintenance vehicle is driven by one or more motors(para 0019-0022; Bellheimer discloses the use of motors to drive vertical movement).
Regarding claim 4, Zombori does not disclose a man-machine interface. However, Bellheimer discloses a man-machine interface(17) configured to enable control of the one or more motors by an operator(para 0027). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zombori such that it comprises a man-made interface to allow improved precision with user inputs as required.
Regarding claim 5,the combination of Zombori and Bellheimer discloses wherein the ascent and descent system comprises a manual ascent and descent mechanism(para 0015,0019,0020; Bellheimer) which is configured to enable the engagement member to be driven, in particular the gear wheels to be driven on the climbing elements(Zombori para 0031) , when the manual ascent and descent mechanism is actuated by an operator(para 0017), the manual ascent and descent mechanism preferably comprising a crank.
Regarding claim 6, Zombori does not specify wherein the ascent and descent system comprises a transmission selectively enabling drive by the one or more motors, or by the manual ascent and descent mechanism. It is noted that the ascent and descent system of Bellheimer is driven by motors (see the rejection of claim 3 above). The examiner takes official notice that the such a motor driven ascent and descent system includes a transmission.
Regarding claim 7, Zombori discloses wherein the engagement member is configured to cooperate with at least six uprights , for example six, eight, ten or twelve uprights(fig 1, claim 1,2 para 0009,0010)
Regarding claim 8, Zombori discloses wheels(6) , preferably freewheels, mounted on the chassis so as to allow the chassis to move on the floor(para 0033).
Regarding claim 12, Zombori discloses a storage and retrieval system (Para 0033) comprising storage racks (2) with consecutive columns of cells(fig 1-4), the storage racks comprising vertical uprights(1) , the storage and retrieval system further comprising a vehicle (4) according to claim 1(See the above rejection of claim 1, para 0033,0038-0040).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zombori(US 20170121110 A1) and Bellheimer (DE 20103565 U1) in view of Zhou(CN 204281241 U) and Weaver(US 5193878 A)
Regarding claim 9, Zombori does not disclose the platform and the guardrails are foldable. However, Zhou discloses a platform with the use of foldable guardrails(fig 1). It would have been obvious to modify Zhou such that the platform comprises foldable guardrails to provide a convenient storage method for the vehicle.
Weaver further discloses the use of foldable platforms(fig 2) in vehicles. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed inventio to modify Zombori to make the base vehicle foldable for ease of storage when the vehicle is not in use.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zombori(US 20170121110 A1) and Bellheimer (DE 20103565 U1) in view of Gebhardt(EP 4455054 A1)
Regarding claim 10, Zombori does not disclose safety mechanisms however Gebhardt discloses a vehicle (54) comprising a safety mechanism (55) configured to prevent tilting of the platform in the vertical direction. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zombori such that the vehicle comprises safety mechanisms to prevent mechanical instability leading to failure.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zombori(US 20170121110 A1) and Bellheimer(DE 20103565 U1) in view of Lert(AU 2016270946 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Zombori does not disclose retractable engagement members. However, Lert discloses a similar vehicle comprising a mechanism for deploying and retracting the engagement member (para 00231, fig 32), with respect to the chassis, from a retracted configuration where the maintenance vehicle takes up less space, to a deployed configuration of the engagement member configured to engage with the uprights(para 00231). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zombori such that the vehicle comprises retractable engagement members to allow the vehicle to be compactly stored.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 13-15 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.
Regarding claim 13, the closes prior art on record is Zombori(US 20170121110 A1). However does not show disclose or render obvious the combination of the storage and retrieval system according to claim 12, wherein the storage racks are arranged so as to form at least one circulation aisle between two respective storage racks, each of the at least one circulation aisle, between two respective storage racks, being formed of a plurality of consecutive vertical circulation columns, each vertical circulation column giving access to at least one respective cell column, wherein the storage and retrieval system further comprises at least one automated guided vehicle configured to ascend and descend in one of the vertical circulation columns. More specifically wherein, each of the at least one automated guided vehicle comprising climbing means configured to engage with climbing elements of the uprights of the storage racks facing said vertical circulation column, the engagement member of the maintenance vehicle being configured to cooperate with said climbing elements of the uprights.
Regarding claim 14, the closes prior art on record is Zombori(US 20170121110 A1). However does not show disclose or render obvious the combination of the storage and retrieval system according to claim 13, wherein the climbing means of one of the at least one automated guided vehicle arranged in a vertical circulation column and the engagement member of the maintenance vehicle guided in at least one vertical circulation column adjoining the vertical circulation column in which the automated guided vehicle is arranged, are configured to cooperate simultaneously with the same upright of one of the storage racks without hindering the movement, in the direction of the upright, of the automated guided vehicle or the maintenance vehicle respectively with respect to said same upright.
Regarding claim 15, the closes prior art on record is Zombori(US 20170121110 A1). However does not show disclose or render obvious the combination of a maintenance method of maintaining a storage and retrieval system according to claim 13, the maintenance method comprising: - moving the maintenance vehicle in said at least one circulation aisle to a vertical circulation column consecutive to a vertical circulation column in which an automated guided vehicle is blocked, - coupling the engagement member of the ascent and descent system with uprights facing the respective circulation aisle , - elevate the platform to the height of the blocked automated guided vehicle by driving the engagement member.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHAMS DHANANI whose telephone number is (571)272-6255. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday (out of office every other Friday) - 8:00 am - 4:00 pm.
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, Jason Shanske can be reached on (571) 270-5985. 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.
SHAMS . DHANANI
Examiner
Art Unit 3614
/JASON D SHANSKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3614
Prosecution Insights