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 .
The preliminary amendments filed on January 31, 2025 and October 23, 2024 have been entered, the amendments to claims and the specification have been entered.
Claims 29-48 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on June 25, 2025 and April 2, 2025 have been considered by the examiner.
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 29-36 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.
In claim 29, line 12, the term “a selected container” is used, it is unclear if this is the same container in line 6 or a different one and needs to be clarified.
In claim 30, lines 2 and 3, the terms “a first conveyor” and “a second conveyor” is used, it is unclear as if this refers to the “conveyor” in claim 29, line 9.
The term “narrow” in claim 31 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “narrow” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear as to what narrow refers to as there is no reference given.
In claim 34, line 2, the term “the selected container” is used, it is unclear which selected container is being referred to back in claim 29 that was stated earlier in the action.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 29 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Claims 30-36 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 37-48 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The prior art does not anticipate or render obvious a method of operating an automated storage and retrieval system having the steps of driving empty containers into a first helical conveyor to provide a plurality of destination containers; depositing an object onto a routing conveyor unit, the routing conveyor unit adapted to traverse on a guide pole, the guide pole arranged at the center of the first helical conveyor; traversing the guide pole with the routing conveyor unit in a vertical and rotational direction relative to the guide pole, the routing conveyor unit being disposed at a position above a selected one of the plurality of destination containers; operating the routing conveyor to deposit the object in the selected one of the plurality of destination containers; and moving the selected one of the plurality of destination containers from the first helical conveyor to an adjacent second helical conveyor in a radially outward direction to remove the selected one of the plurality of destination containers from the automated storage and retrieval system as recited as a whole together in claim 37.
The prior art does not anticipate or render obvious an automated storage and retrieval system having storage containers arranged on a continuously elevating helical storage conveyor, the continuously elevating helical storage conveyor having a central region; a support column arranged at a center of the central region; a routing conveyor unit adapted to traverse the column in a vertical direction and to rotate about the column to be positioned at any of a selected position above any of the storage containers; the routing conveyor unit comprising a conveyor operable at any of the selected positions; and a continuously elevating helical output conveyor positioned radially outward and aligned with the continuously elevating helical storage conveyor as recited as a whole together in claim 43.
The closest prior art is U.S. Patent No. 8,302,763 to Broers et al. that teaches two helical conveyors and two support poles.
However, the Broers patent lacks a teaching that the two conveyors are radially outside one another.
It would not have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the subject invention to modify the Broers patent to have the features of the subject invention without the use of impermissible hindsight.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent No. 10,999,973 to Millar et al. teaches two conveyors next to each other.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN HOLMES whose telephone number is (571)272-3448. The examiner can normally be reached 10AM-6PM EST M-F.
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, Jacob S Scott can be reached at 571-270-3415. 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.
/JUSTIN HOLMES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3655
