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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on 11/27/2024 and 02/27/2026 have been considered by the Examiner.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chu (US 2025/0182025 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Chu discloses an article transport facility (In paragraph [0087], Chu discloses an intelligent horizontal transportation system for automatic loading or unloading at a container terminal that comprises a plurality of autonomous transport robots (ATRs) and an ATR control system) comprising:
a plurality of transport vehicles configured to travel along a predetermined route (In paragraphs [0087-0088], Chu discloses an intelligent horizontal transportation system for automatic loading or unloading at a container terminal that comprises a plurality of autonomous transport robots (ATRs) and an ATR control system, where a task scheduling module is configured to determine a horizontal transportation operational plan for loading and unloading ships and shifting containers, generate an initial transport path based on the horizontal transportation operational plan and real-time positions of the plurality of ATRs within the container terminal, optimize the initial transport path based on principles of minimizing operation time and minimizing operation path, and assign the optimized transport path to at least one ATR; see also paragraph [0132] where a traffic management module is configured to real-time detect number and positions of external container trucks at an intersection located at an entrance or exit of a storage yard using a vehicle-road coordination technology, and real-time determine a passing order of the ATRs at the intersection based on the real-time number and positions of external container trucks); and
a control device configured to control the transport vehicles (In paragraph [0087], Chu discloses that the ATR control system is in real-time communication with the plurality of ATRs, and is configured to manage and control the plurality of ATRs), and
wherein:
the control device is configured to execute merging control for controlling operations of a plurality of the transport vehicles in a merging area where a plurality of portions of the route merge (In paragraph [0087], Chu discloses that the ATR control system comprises a traffic management module; in paragraph [0132], Chu discloses that the traffic management module is configured to real-time detect number and positions of external container trucks at an intersection located at an entrance or exit of a storage yard using a vehicle-road coordination technology, and real-time determine a passing order of the ATRs at the intersection based on the real-time number and positions of external container trucks),
the merging control comprises a sequencing process of determining an order of passage in which a plurality of passage target vehicles pass through the merging area, the plurality of passage target vehicles comprising a plurality of the transport vehicles that are going to pass through the merging area concurrently (In paragraph [0132], Chu discloses that the traffic management module is configured to real-time detect number and positions of external container trucks at an intersection located at an entrance or exit of a storage yard using a vehicle-road coordination technology, and real-time determine a passing order of the ATRs at the intersection based on the real-time number and positions of external container trucks),
in the sequencing process, the control device is configured to determine the order of passage according to waiting time indices for the plurality of passage target vehicles that are determined based on waiting times of the plurality of passage target vehicles at the merging area (In paragraphs [0132-0141], Chu discloses example strategies for dynamically adjusting the passing order and path of the ATRs, for example, when the waiting time for an external container truck exceeds 20 minutes or when the number of waiting external container trucks exceeds three, external container trucks are given forced priority to pass; the Examiner understands the adjusted order and path priority to be waiting time indices under its broadest reasonable interpretation in that they are adjusted based on waiting time, e.g. when the waiting time for an external container truck exceeds 20 minutes, and therefore indicate at least waiting time), and
the waiting time indices are each determined by correcting the waiting time using a correction coefficient determined based on a status of each of the plurality of passage target vehicles (In paragraphs [0132-0141], Chu discloses example strategies for dynamically adjusting the passing order and path of the ATRs, for example, inside the container terminal, the ATRs are given higher priority than the external container trucks, and when the waiting time for an external container truck exceeds 20 minutes or when the number of waiting external container trucks exceeds three, external container trucks are given forced priority to pass; the Examiner understands the priority adjustment to include at least a correction coefficient which corrects the waiting time under its broadest reasonable interpretation in that the waiting time indices as described above are adjusted based on various statuses of the vehicles).
Regarding claim 2, Chu further discloses wherein, in the sequencing process, the control device is configured to compare the waiting time indices for the plurality of passage target vehicles and allow the passage target vehicle with a highest waiting time index to pass through the merging area before the other passage target vehicles (In paragraphs [0132-0141], Chu discloses example strategies for dynamically adjusting the passing order and path of the ATRs, for example, inside the container terminal, the ATRs are given higher priority than the external container trucks, and when the waiting time for an external container truck exceeds 20 minutes or when the number of waiting external container trucks exceeds three, external container trucks are given forced priority to pass; the Examiner understands the adjusted order and path priority to be waiting time indices under its broadest reasonable interpretation in that they are adjusted based on waiting time, e.g. when the waiting time for an external container truck exceeds 20 minutes, and therefore indicate at least waiting time, where the highest waiting time index corresponds to a highest priority for example).
Regarding claim 5, Chu further discloses wherein the correction coefficient is set so that the higher a congestion level on a portion of the route where the passage target vehicle is located, the higher the waiting time index (In paragraphs [0132-0141], Chu discloses example strategies for dynamically adjusting the passing order and path of the ATRs, for example, inside the container terminal, the ATRs are given higher priority than the external container trucks, and when the waiting time for an external container truck exceeds 20 minutes or when the number of waiting external container trucks exceeds three, external container trucks are given forced priority to pass; the Examiner understands the number of waiting external container trucks exceeding three to be an example of congestion level on a portion of the route where the passage target vehicle is located).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chu (US 2025/0182025 A1), in view of Otsuki (US 12,062,006 B2).
Regarding claim 3, Chu does not explicitly disclose wherein the correction coefficient is set so that when the passage target vehicle is transporting an article, the waiting time index for the passage target vehicle is higher than when the passage target vehicle is not transporting the article.
However, Otsuki teaches wherein the correction coefficient is set so that when the passage target vehicle is transporting an article, the waiting time index for the passage target vehicle is higher than when the passage target vehicle is not transporting the article (From column 8 line 60 to column 9 line 12, Otsuki teaches that the delivery management server 32 refers to a delivery priority level of the package 60 that the delivery robot 20 is delivering, when determining the order in which the delivery robot 20 passes through the bottleneck section, where the delivery robot 20, whose delivery priority level is zero is not delivering a package, the delivery robot 20 not delivering a package including, for example, the delivery robot 20 having completed the delivery of a package, the delivery robot 20 being on the way to receive a package, and the delivery robot 20 being on standby).
Otsuki is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention in that they both pertain to determining the priority of vehicles passing depending on if the vehicle is transporting something. It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the teachings of Otsuki with the facility as disclosed by Chu, where doing so can increase efficiency of the article transportation, for example, by increasing the contextual sensitivity of the vehicle priority according to a wider variety of variables. For example, doing so may advantageously ensure faster delivery of the articles to their destinations.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chu (US 2025/0182025 A1), in view of Choi (US 2018/0239358 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Chu does not explicitly disclose wherein the correction coefficient is set so that when the passage target vehicle is located on a straight segment of the route that merges linearly into the merging area, the waiting time index for the passage target vehicle is higher than when the passage target vehicle is located on a curved segment of the route that merges in a curved manner into the merging area.
However, Choi teaches wherein the correction coefficient is set so that when the passage target vehicle is located on a straight segment of the route that merges linearly into the merging area, the waiting time index for the passage target vehicle is higher than when the passage target vehicle is located on a curved segment of the route that merges in a curved manner into the merging area (In paragraph [0066], Choi teaches that when the vehicles located on different links and roads compete against each other (for example, an intersection, an entry lane, etc.), the waiting time calculation device 132 may, in the case of an intersection, give a higher priority to a straight-ahead vehicle than a left or right-turning vehicle).
Choi is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention in that they both pertain to determining the priority of vehicles passing depending on if the vehicle is proceeding straight or turning at an intersection. It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the teachings of Choi with the facility as disclosed by Chu, where doing so can increase efficiency of the article transportation, for example, by increasing the contextual sensitivity of the vehicle priority according to a wider variety of variables. For example, doing so may advantageously allow vehicle which do not need to decrease their speed at the intersection, i.e. a vehicle proceeding straight rather than requiring turning at an intersection, to maintain their speed.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-7 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.
Kim (US 2025/0153752 A1) discloses a method of departure management of an automated guided vehicle and a departure management system of an automated guided vehicle for performing the same.
Zhang (US 2024/0132109 A1) teaches a vehicle control method, apparatus, and system, including passage rule information of the road junction which may include at least one evaluation parameter that is used to evaluate a passing sequence position of a vehicle and a weight of the evaluation parameter.
Yamaguchi (US 2022/0144273 A1) teaches a driving assistance method and driving assistance device including where at the intersection, the priority for the second other vehicle v2 that travels straight ahead is higher than the priority for the host vehicle 20 that travels on the route p0 to turn right at the intersection.
Bolotski (US 11,086,336 B1) teaches wireless communication with robots tasked with sorting items.
Nakadai (US 2021/0101617 A1) teaches a vehicle control system, self-driving vehicle, vehicle control method, and program including where a right-turning vehicle counts up the priority of the host vehicle according to the waiting time, and when the priority becomes higher than that of a straight-running vehicle, it asks for a passage permission from the straight-running vehicle.
Lin (US 2019/0206237 A1) teaches a vehicle right-of-way management method and apparatus, and terminal.
Mishina (US 2019/0035278 A1) teaches a driving assistance method and device, including where the parallel traveling vehicle V2 has a higher priority level than that of the other vehicle V3 turning right at the intersection because the parallel traveling vehicle V2 is traveling straight ahead in the oncoming lane.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Harrison Heflin whose telephone number is (571)272-5629. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 1:00PM - 10:00PM EST.
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, Hunter Lonsberry can be reached at 571-272-7298. 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.
/HARRISON HEFLIN/ Examiner, Art Unit 3665
/HUNTER B LONSBERRY/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665