DETAILED ACTION
Notice of 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 statement (IDS) submitted on September 18, 2025, was filed after the mailing date of the application on December 13, 2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 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) 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):
(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). The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) 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). The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) 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) 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) except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) because the claim limitations use a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are:
“an electronic apparatus …” in claim 23.
“a plurality of conditional modules …” in claim 23.
Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. If applicant does not intend to have these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), Applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitations to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitations recite sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Step 1: Claims 1-11 are drawn to a device, claims 12-22 are drawn to a product of manufacture, and claims 23-33 are drawn to a process, each of which is within the four statutory categories (e.g., a process, a machine). (Step 1: YES).
Step 2A – Prong One: In prong one of step 2A, the claims are analyzed to evaluate whether they recite a judicial exception.
Claim 1 (representative of claims 12 and 23) recites/describes the following steps:
“inspect the delivery order by using the plurality of conditional modules…according to the inspection order;”
“perform dispatch-order automation processing on the delivery order when the delivery order passes inspections of the plurality of conditional modules;” and
“stop using the remaining conditional modules to inspect the delivery order every time when the delivery order fails an inspection of any of the plurality of conditional modules in the inspection order.”
These steps, under broadest reasonable interpretation, describe or set-forth dispatching or holding delivery orders based on an inspection of the order, which amounts to commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations). These limitations therefore fall within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” subject matter grouping of abstract ideas.
As such, the Examiner concludes that claim 1 recites an abstract idea (Step 2A – Prong One: YES).
Each of the depending claims 2-11, 13-22, and 24-33 likewise recite/describe these steps (by incorporation - and therefore also recite limitations that fall within this subject matter grouping of abstract ideas), and these claims are therefore determined to recite an abstract idea under the same analysis. Any elements recited in a dependent claim that are not specifically identified/addressed by the Examiner under step 2A (prong two) or step 2B of this analysis shall be understood to be an additional part of the abstract idea recited by that particular claim.
Step 2A – Prong Two:
The claims recite the additional elements/limitations of: “an electronic apparatus for logistics management, comprising: a storage, being configured to store a delivery order and an inspection configuration file, wherein the inspection configuration file comprises a plurality of conditional modules, and the plurality of conditional modules correspond to an inspection order; and a processor,” (claim 1); “a non-transitory computer-readable medium, after being loaded into an electronic apparatus,” “a plurality of conditional modules of an inspection configuration file,” (claim 12); and “an electronic apparatus,” “a plurality of conditional modules of an inspection configuration file,” (claim 23).
The requirement to execute the claimed steps/functions using “an electronic apparatus for logistics management, comprising: a storage, being configured to store a delivery order and an inspection configuration file, wherein the inspection configuration file comprises a plurality of conditional modules, and the plurality of conditional modules correspond to an inspection order; and a processor,” (claim 1); “a non-transitory computer-readable medium, after being loaded into an electronic apparatus,” “a plurality of conditional modules of an inspection configuration file,” (claim 12); and “an electronic apparatus,” “a plurality of conditional modules of an inspection configuration file,” (claim 23), is equivalent to adding the words “apply it” on a generic computer and/or mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a generic computer. These limitations do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and therefore do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. See § MPEP 2106.05(f).
Remaining dependent claims 2-11, 13-22, and 24-33 either recite the same additional elements as noted above or fail to recite any additional elements (in which case, note prong one analysis as set forth above – those claims are further part of the abstract idea as identified by the Examiner for each respective dependent claim).
The Examiner has therefore determined that the additional elements, or combination of additional elements, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Accordingly, the claims are directed to an abstract idea (Step 2A – Prong two: NO).
Step 2B:
As discussed above in “Step 2A – Prong 2,” the requirement to execute the claimed steps/functions using “an electronic apparatus for logistics management, comprising: a storage, being configured to store a delivery order and an inspection configuration file, wherein the inspection configuration file comprises a plurality of conditional modules, and the plurality of conditional modules correspond to an inspection order; and a processor,” (claim 1); “a non-transitory computer-readable medium, after being loaded into an electronic apparatus,” “a plurality of conditional modules of an inspection configuration file,” (claim 12); and “an electronic apparatus,” “a plurality of conditional modules of an inspection configuration file,” (claim 23), is equivalent to adding the words “apply it” on a generic computer and/or mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a generic computer. These limitations therefore do not qualify as “significantly more.” See MPEP § 2106.05(f).
Viewing the additional limitations in combination also shows that they fail to ensure the claims amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. When considered as an ordered combination, the additional components of the claims add nothing that is not already present when considered separately, and thus simply append the abstract idea with words equivalent to “apply it” on a generic computer and/or mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a generic computer.
Remaining dependent claims 2-11, 13-22, and 24-33 either recite the same additional elements as noted above or fail to recite any additional elements (in which case, note prong one analysis as set forth above – those claims are further part of the abstract idea as identified by the Examiner for each respective dependent claim).
The Examiner has therefore determined that no additional element, or combination of additional claims elements is/are sufficient to ensure the claims amount to significantly more than the abstract idea identified above (Step 2B: NO).
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 1-4, 10-15, 21-26, 32, and 33, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Johnson et al. (US 2019/0138978 A1), hereinafter Johnson.
Regarding claim 1, Johnson discloses an electronic apparatus for logistics management (Par. [0011], warehouse order system), comprising:
a storage, being configured to store a delivery order (Par. [0011], plurality of orders) and an inspection configuration file, wherein the inspection configuration file comprises a plurality of conditional modules, and the plurality of conditional modules correspond to an inspection order (Par. [0011], The processor is also configured to group the plurality of orders based on the physical locations of the cluster regions in the warehouse to form at least one order set); and
a processor (Par. [0011], The system also includes a processor), being electrically connected with the storage and being configured to:
inspect the delivery order by using the plurality of conditional modules of the inspection configuration file according to the inspection order (Par. [0074], the process begins to assess the first order in the order queue. At step 704, the x, y coordinates of the first item (which may be based on a specific pick sequence) in the first order in the queue are obtained and the item is plotted on the image of the warehouse. The order of selection of items from the order (pick sequence) may be a factor in establishing effective cluster regions);
perform dispatch-order automation processing on the delivery order when the delivery order passes inspections of the plurality of conditional modules (Par. [0075], The system proceeds to step 708, where the evaluation of the remaining items in the first order is undertaken); and
stop using the remaining conditional modules to inspect the delivery order every time when the delivery order fails an inspection of any of the plurality of conditional modules in the inspection order (Par. [0078], If at step 708 it is determined that there are no further items in that order to assess, the system proceeds to step 720 (as is the case of order one after items 608 a-608 c have been assessed)).
Regarding claim 2, Johnson discloses the electronic apparatus according to Claim 1. Johnson further discloses wherein each of the plurality of conditional modules is a single inspection condition or a logical combination of a plurality of inspection conditions (Par. [0078], If at step 708 it is determined that there are no further items in that order to assess, the system proceeds to step 720 (as is the case of order one after items 608 a-608 c have been assessed)).
Regarding claim 3, Johnson discloses the electronic apparatus according to Claim 1. Johnson further discloses wherein the processor is further configured to: in the dispatch-order automation processing, divide the delivery order into a hot processing area or a cold processing area depending on whether the delivery order meets a preparatory condition (Par. [0075], If the location is within the space defined by the first established cluster region, the system proceeds to step 712 and adds the location of the item to the cluster region within which it is located. If, alternatively, it is determined that the next location is not contained within any existing cluster region, as is the case with location 608 b, FIG. 9, the system proceeds to step 714 – system determines if items in order are within a defined cluster region, “hot processing area”).
Regarding claim 4, Johnson discloses the electronic apparatus according to Claim 3. Johnson further discloses wherein the processor is further configured to: wait for a dispatch condition to be met and then generate a real dispatch order for the delivery order in the storage, in a case where the delivery order is divided into the hot processing area (Par. [0076], If, alternatively, in step 714 it is determined that there is room for a new cluster region, at step 718, a new cluster is created by applying the predetermined radius, R, to the location of the current item).
Regarding claim 10, Johnson discloses the electronic apparatus according to Claim 3. Johnson further discloses wherein the processor is further configured to: temporarily shelve the delivery order when the delivery order is divided into the cold processing area (Par. [0091], At step 914 the base order is combined with the subsequent n−1 orders in the queue, where n is the maximum number of orders that the robot is able to transport. The system then returns to step 902 where the queue is resorted by priority and the process continues – orders with items outside of clusters are given lowest priority).
Regarding claim 11, Johnson discloses the electronic apparatus according to Claim 10. Johnson further discloses wherein the processor is further configured to: re-divide the delivery order that has been divided into the cold processing area into the hot processing area when the delivery order that has been divided into the cold processing area becomes in line with the preparatory condition (Par. [0091], At step 914 the base order is combined with the subsequent n−1 orders in the queue, where n is the maximum number of orders that the robot is able to transport. The system then returns to step 902 where the queue is resorted by priority and the process continues – orders are re clustered and reordered for priority when items are determined to be in designated clusters).
Regarding claim 12, Johnson discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium, after being loaded into an electronic apparatus, enabling the electronic apparatus to execute the following instructions, comprising:
inspecting a delivery order by using a plurality of conditional modules of an inspection configuration file according to an inspection order which the plurality of conditional modules correspond to (Par. [0011], The processor is also configured to group the plurality of orders based on the physical locations of the cluster regions in the warehouse to form at least one order set; Par. [0074], the process begins to assess the first order in the order queue. At step 704, the x, y coordinates of the first item (which may be based on a specific pick sequence) in the first order in the queue are obtained and the item is plotted on the image of the warehouse. The order of selection of items from the order (pick sequence) may be a factor in establishing effective cluster regions);
performing dispatch-order automation processing on the delivery order when the delivery order passes inspections of the plurality of conditional modules (Par. [0075], The system proceeds to step 708, where the evaluation of the remaining items in the first order is undertaken); and
stopping using the remaining conditional modules to inspect the delivery order every time when the delivery order fails an inspection of any of the plurality of conditional modules in the inspection order (Par. [0078], If at step 708 it is determined that there are no further items in that order to assess, the system proceeds to step 720 (as is the case of order one after items 608 a-608 c have been assessed)).
Regarding claim 13, Johnson discloses the non-transitory computer-readable medium according to Claim 12. Johnson further discloses wherein each of the plurality of conditional modules is a single inspection condition or a logical combination of a plurality of inspection conditions (Par. [0078], If at step 708 it is determined that there are no further items in that order to assess, the system proceeds to step 720 (as is the case of order one after items 608 a-608 c have been assessed)).
Regarding claim 14, Johnson discloses the non-transitory computer-readable medium according to Claim 12. Johnson further discloses in the dispatch-order automation processing, divide the delivery order into a hot processing area or a cold processing area depending on whether the delivery order meets a preparatory condition (Par. [0075], If the location is within the space defined by the first established cluster region, the system proceeds to step 712 and adds the location of the item to the cluster region within which it is located. If, alternatively, it is determined that the next location is not contained within any existing cluster region, as is the case with location 608 b, FIG. 9, the system proceeds to step 714 – system determines if items in order are within a defined cluster region, “hot processing area”).
Regarding claim 15, Johnson discloses the non-transitory computer-readable medium according to Claim 14. Johnson further discloses wait for a dispatch condition to be met and then generate a real dispatch order for the delivery order in the storage, in a case where the delivery order is divided into the hot processing area (Par. [0076], If, alternatively, in step 714 it is determined that there is room for a new cluster region, at step 718, a new cluster is created by applying the predetermined radius, R, to the location of the current item).
Regarding claim 21, Johnson discloses the non-transitory computer-readable medium according to Claim 14. Johnson further discloses temporarily shelve the delivery order when the delivery order is divided into the cold processing area (Par. [0091], At step 914 the base order is combined with the subsequent n−1 orders in the queue, where n is the maximum number of orders that the robot is able to transport. The system then returns to step 902 where the queue is resorted by priority and the process continues – orders with items outside of clusters are given lowest priority).
Regarding claim 22, Johnson discloses the non-transitory computer-readable medium according to Claim 21. Johnson further discloses re-divide the delivery order that has been divided into the cold processing area into the hot processing area when the delivery order that has been divided into the cold processing area becomes in line with the preparatory condition (Par. [0091], At step 914 the base order is combined with the subsequent n−1 orders in the queue, where n is the maximum number of orders that the robot is able to transport. The system then returns to step 902 where the queue is resorted by priority and the process continues – orders are re clustered and reordered for priority when items are determined to be in designated clusters).
Regarding claim 23, Johnson discloses a dispatch-order generation method executed by an electronic apparatus, comprising:
inspecting a delivery order by using a plurality of conditional modules of an inspection configuration file according to an inspection order which the plurality of conditional modules correspond to (Par. [0011], The processor is also configured to group the plurality of orders based on the physical locations of the cluster regions in the warehouse to form at least one order set; Par. [0074], the process begins to assess the first order in the order queue. At step 704, the x, y coordinates of the first item (which may be based on a specific pick sequence) in the first order in the queue are obtained and the item is plotted on the image of the warehouse. The order of selection of items from the order (pick sequence) may be a factor in establishing effective cluster regions);
performing dispatch-order automation processing on the delivery order when the delivery order passes inspections of the plurality of conditional modules (Par. [0075], The system proceeds to step 708, where the evaluation of the remaining items in the first order is undertaken); and
stopping using the remaining conditional modules to inspect the delivery order every time when the delivery order fails an inspection of any of the plurality of conditional modules in the inspection order (Par. [0078], If at step 708 it is determined that there are no further items in that order to assess, the system proceeds to step 720 (as is the case of order one after items 608 a-608 c have been assessed)).
Regarding claim 24, Johnson discloses the dispatch-order generation method according to Claim 23. Johnson further discloses wherein each of the plurality of conditional modules is a single inspection condition or a logical combination of a plurality of inspection conditions (Par. [0078], If at step 708 it is determined that there are no further items in that order to assess, the system proceeds to step 720 (as is the case of order one after items 608 a-608 c have been assessed)).
Regarding claim 25, Johnson discloses the dispatch-order generation method according to Claim 23. Johnson further discloses in the dispatch-order automation processing, divide the delivery order into a hot processing area or a cold processing area depending on whether the delivery order meets a preparatory condition (Par. [0075], If the location is within the space defined by the first established cluster region, the system proceeds to step 712 and adds the location of the item to the cluster region within which it is located. If, alternatively, it is determined that the next location is not contained within any existing cluster region, as is the case with location 608 b, FIG. 9, the system proceeds to step 714 – system determines if items in order are within a defined cluster region, “hot processing area”).
Regarding claim 26, Johnson discloses the dispatch-order generation method according to Claim 25. Johnson further discloses wait for a dispatch condition to be met and then generate a real dispatch order for the delivery order in the storage, in a case where the delivery order is divided into the hot processing area (Par. [0076], If, alternatively, in step 714 it is determined that there is room for a new cluster region, at step 718, a new cluster is created by applying the predetermined radius, R, to the location of the current item).
Regarding claim 32, Johnson discloses the dispatch-order generation method according to Claim 25. Johnson further discloses temporarily shelve the delivery order when the delivery order is divided into the cold processing area (Par. [0091], At step 914 the base order is combined with the subsequent n−1 orders in the queue, where n is the maximum number of orders that the robot is able to transport. The system then returns to step 902 where the queue is resorted by priority and the process continues – orders with items outside of clusters are given lowest priority).
Regarding claim 33, Johnson discloses the dispatch-order generation method according to Claim 32. Johnson further discloses re-divide the delivery order that has been divided into the cold processing area into the hot processing area when the delivery order that has been divided into the cold processing area becomes in line with the preparatory condition (Par. [0091], At step 914 the base order is combined with the subsequent n−1 orders in the queue, where n is the maximum number of orders that the robot is able to transport. The system then returns to step 902 where the queue is resorted by priority and the process continues – orders are re clustered and reordered for priority when items are determined to be in designated clusters).
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.
Claims 5-9, 16-20, and 27-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Johnson (US 2019/0138978 A1) in view of Perry et al. (US 2014/0040075 A1), hereinafter Perry.
Regarding claim 5, Johnson discloses the electronic apparatus according to Claim 3. Johnson does not explicitly disclose wherein the processor is further configured to: determine whether to generate a virtual dispatch order in advance for the delivery order in the storage, in a case where the delivery order is divided into the hot processing area. Perry teaches determine whether to generate a virtual dispatch order in advance for the delivery order in the storage, in a case where the delivery order is divided into the hot processing area (Par. [0066], To ensure orders are grouped into optimal pack groups, in some embodiments, the system may analyze each item in an order to identify a product ID, determine a shelf, room, or other subarea corresponding to the product ID, and determine a virtual order footprint for the order).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the logistics system of Johnson to include the virtual order abilities of Perry as a need exists to improve the efficiency of order fulfilment processes (Perry, Par. [0027]). Incorporating virtual order abilities in the logistics system of Johnson would improve the efficiency of the system to provide more economical and scalable volume distribution operations.
Regarding claim 6, Johnson and Perry disclose the electronic apparatus according to Claim 5. Perry further discloses wherein the processor is further configured to: determine whether to generate the virtual dispatch order for the delivery order in the storage according to system resources of a dispatch period in a case of batch processing (Par. [0066], To ensure orders are grouped into optimal pack groups, in some embodiments, the system may analyze each item in an order to identify a product ID, determine a shelf, room, or other subarea corresponding to the product ID, and determine a virtual order footprint for the order).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the logistics system of Johnson to include the virtual order abilities of Perry as a need exists to improve the efficiency of order fulfilment processes (Perry, Par. [0027]). Incorporating virtual order abilities in the logistics system of Johnson would improve the efficiency of the system to provide more economical and scalable volume distribution operations.
Regarding claim 7, Johnson and Perry disclose the electronic apparatus according to Claim 6. Perry further discloses wherein the processor is further configured to: determine a priority level of generating the virtual dispatch order according to a preset condition in a case where it is determined that the virtual dispatch order is to be generated for the delivery order (Par. [0046], A purpose of order pool mining is to select an order or orders to activate from among the highest priority orders, but also allow orders to be activated that will optimize the efficiency of the work. In some cases, the latter may involve violating a predetermined priority sequence to achieve order synergy. For example, in one embodiment, orders with similar virtual order footprints may be selected within a configurable limit with respect to time and/or a number of orders regardless of their respective priority position in the priority sequence).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the logistics system of Johnson to include the virtual order abilities of Perry as a need exists to improve the efficiency of order fulfilment processes (Perry, Par. [0027]). Incorporating virtual order abilities in the logistics system of Johnson would improve the efficiency of the system to provide more economical and scalable volume distribution operations.
Regarding claim 8, Johnson and Perry disclose the electronic apparatus according to Claim 5. Perry further discloses wherein the processor is further configured to: determine whether to generate the virtual dispatch order in advance for the delivery order in the storage according to a virtual dispatch-order completion rate of a customer which the delivery order corresponds to (Par. [0046], Other factors that may impact how long orders are held up may include the oldest order age (in the batch category), the total held order (work) backlog, a scheduled workforce availability, a work rate and a required completion time (departure time)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the logistics system of Johnson to include the virtual order abilities of Perry as a need exists to improve the efficiency of order fulfilment processes (Perry, Par. [0027]). Incorporating virtual order abilities in the logistics system of Johnson would improve the efficiency of the system to provide more economical and scalable volume distribution operations.
Regarding claim 9, Johnson and Perry disclose the electronic apparatus according to Claim 5. Perry further discloses wherein the processor is further configured to: generate the virtual dispatch order in advance for the delivery order in the storage, wait for a dispatch condition to be met, and then convert the virtual dispatch order into a real dispatch order (Par. [0090], Based at least in part on the order counts thus determined, the method may proceed to selecting which of the plurality of virtual potential pick batches are to be released for processing by the work resources that have become available).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the logistics system of Johnson to include the virtual order abilities of Perry as a need exists to improve the efficiency of order fulfilment processes (Perry, Par. [0027]). Incorporating virtual order abilities in the logistics system of Johnson would improve the efficiency of the system to provide more economical and scalable volume distribution operations.
Regarding claim 16, Johnson discloses the non-transitory computer-readable medium according to Claim 14. Johnson does not explicitly disclose wherein the processor is further configured to: determine whether to generate a virtual dispatch order in advance for the delivery order in the storage, in a case where the delivery order is divided into the hot processing area. Perry teaches determine whether to generate a virtual dispatch order in advance for the delivery order in the storage, in a case where the delivery order is divided into the hot processing area (Par. [0066], To ensure orders are grouped into optimal pack groups, in some embodiments, the system may analyze each item in an order to identify a product ID, determine a shelf, room, or other subarea corresponding to the product ID, and determine a virtual order footprint for the order).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the logistics system of Johnson to include the virtual order abilities of Perry as a need exists to improve the efficiency of order fulfilment processes (Perry, Par. [0027]). Incorporating virtual order abilities in the logistics system of Johnson would improve the efficiency of the system to provide more economical and scalable volume distribution operations.
Regarding claim 17, Johnson and Perry disclose the non-transitory computer-readable medium according to Claim 16. Perry further discloses wherein the processor is further configured to: determine whether to generate the virtual dispatch order for the delivery order in the storage according to system resources of a dispatch period in a case of batch processing (Par. [0066], To ensure orders are grouped into optimal pack groups, in some embodiments, the system may analyze each item in an order to identify a product ID, determine a shelf, room, or other subarea corresponding to the product ID, and determine a virtual order footprint for the order).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the logistics system of Johnson to include the virtual order abilities of Perry as a need exists to improve the efficiency of order fulfilment processes (Perry, Par. [0027]). Incorporating virtual order abilities in the logistics system of Johnson would improve the efficiency of the system to provide more economical and scalable volume distribution operations.
Regarding claim 18, Johnson and Perry disclose the non-transitory computer-readable medium according to Claim 17. Perry further discloses wherein the processor is further configured to: determine a priority level of generating the virtual dispatch order according to a preset condition in a case where it is determined that the virtual dispatch order is to be generated for the delivery order (Par. [0046], A purpose of order pool mining is to select an order or orders to activate from among the highest priority orders, but also allow orders to be activated that will optimize the efficiency of the work. In some cases, the latter may involve violating a predetermined priority sequence to achieve order synergy. For example, in one embodiment, orders with similar virtual order footprints may be selected within a configurable limit with respect to time and/or a number of orders regardless of their respective priority position in the priority sequence).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the logistics system of Johnson to include the virtual order abilities of Perry as a need exists to improve the efficiency of order fulfilment processes (Perry, Par. [0027]). Incorporating virtual order abilities in the logistics system of Johnson would improve the efficiency of the system to provide more economical and scalable volume distribution operations.
Regarding claim 19, Johnson and Perry disclose the non-transitory computer-readable medium according to Claim 16. Perry further discloses wherein the processor is further configured to: determine whether to generate the virtual dispatch order in advance for the delivery order in the storage according to a virtual dispatch-order completion rate of a customer which the delivery order corresponds to (Par. [0046], Other factors that may impact how long orders are held up may include the oldest order age (in the batch category), the total held order (work) backlog, a scheduled workforce availability, a work rate and a required completion time (departure time)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the logistics system of Johnson to include the virtual order abilities of Perry as a need exists to improve the efficiency of order fulfilment processes (Perry, Par. [0027]). Incorporating virtual order abilities in the logistics system of Johnson would improve the efficiency of the system to provide more economical and scalable volume distribution operations.
Regarding claim 20, Johnson and Perry disclose the non-transitory computer-readable medium according to Claim 16. Perry further discloses wherein the processor is further configured to: generate the virtual dispatch order in advance for the delivery order in the storage, wait for a dispatch condition to be met, and then convert the virtual dispatch order into a real dispatch order (Par. [0090], Based at least in part on the order counts thus determined, the method may proceed to selecting which of the plurality of virtual potential pick batches are to be released for processing by the work resources that have become available).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the logistics system of Johnson to include the virtual order abilities of Perry as a need exists to improve the efficiency of order fulfilment processes (Perry, Par. [0027]). Incorporating virtual order abilities in the logistics system of Johnson would improve the efficiency of the system to provide more economical and scalable volume distribution operations.
Regarding claim 27, Johnson discloses the dispatch-order generation method according to Claim 25. Johnson does not explicitly disclose wherein the processor is further configured to: determine whether to generate a virtual dispatch order in advance for the delivery order in the storage, in a case where the delivery order is divided into the hot processing area. Perry teaches determine whether to generate a virtual dispatch order in advance for the delivery order in the storage, in a case where the delivery order is divided into the hot processing area (Par. [0066], To ensure orders are grouped into optimal pack groups, in some embodiments, the system may analyze each item in an order to identify a product ID, determine a shelf, room, or other subarea corresponding to the product ID, and determine a virtual order footprint for the order).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the logistics system of Johnson to include the virtual order abilities of Perry as a need exists to improve the efficiency of order fulfilment processes (Perry, Par. [0027]). Incorporating virtual order abilities in the logistics system of Johnson would improve the efficiency of the system to provide more economical and scalable volume distribution operations.
Regarding claim 28, Johnson and Perry disclose the dispatch-order generation method according to Claim 27. Perry further discloses wherein the processor is further configured to: determine whether to generate the virtual dispatch order for the delivery order in the storage according to system resources of a dispatch period in a case of batch processing (Par. [0066], To ensure orders are grouped into optimal pack groups, in some embodiments, the system may analyze each item in an order to identify a product ID, determine a shelf, room, or other subarea corresponding to the product ID, and determine a virtual order footprint for the order).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the logistics system of Johnson to include the virtual order abilities of Perry as a need exists to improve the efficiency of order fulfilment processes (Perry, Par. [0027]). Incorporating virtual order abilities in the logistics system of Johnson would improve the efficiency of the system to provide more economical and scalable volume distribution operations.
Regarding claim 29, Johnson and Perry disclose the dispatch-order generation method according to Claim 28. Perry further discloses wherein the processor is further configured to: determine a priority level of generating the virtual dispatch order according to a preset condition in a case where it is determined that the virtual dispatch order is to be generated for the delivery order (Par. [0046], A purpose of order pool mining is to select an order or orders to activate from among the highest priority orders, but also allow orders to be activated that will optimize the efficiency of the work. In some cases, the latter may involve violating a predetermined priority sequence to achieve order synergy. For example, in one embodiment, orders with similar virtual order footprints may be selected within a configurable limit with respect to time and/or a number of orders regardless of their respective priority position in the priority sequence).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the logistics system of Johnson to include the virtual order abilities of Perry as a need exists to improve the efficiency of order fulfilment processes (Perry, Par. [0027]). Incorporating virtual order abilities in the logistics system of Johnson would improve the efficiency of the system to provide more economical and scalable volume distribution operations.
Regarding claim 30, Johnson and Perry disclose the dispatch-order generation method according to Claim 27. Perry further discloses wherein the processor is further configured to: determine whether to generate the virtual dispatch order in advance for the delivery order in the storage according to a virtual dispatch-order completion rate of a customer which the delivery order corresponds to (Par. [0046], Other factors that may impact how long orders are held up may include the oldest order age (in the batch category), the total held order (work) backlog, a scheduled workforce availability, a work rate and a required completion time (departure time)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the logistics system of Johnson to include the virtual order abilities of Perry as a need exists to improve the efficiency of order fulfilment processes (Perry, Par. [0027]). Incorporating virtual order abilities in the logistics system of Johnson would improve the efficiency of the system to provide more economical and scalable volume distribution operations.
Regarding claim 31, Johnson and Perry disclose the dispatch-order generation method according to Claim 27. Perry further discloses wherein the processor is further configured to: generate the virtual dispatch order in advance for the delivery order in the storage, wait for a dispatch condition to be met, and then convert the virtual dispatch order into a real dispatch order (Par. [0090], Based at least in part on the order counts thus determined, the method may proceed to selecting which of the plurality of virtual potential pick batches are to be released for processing by the work resources that have become available).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the logistics system of Johnson to include the virtual order abilities of Perry as a need exists to improve the efficiency of order fulfilment processes (Perry, Par. [0027]). Incorporating virtual order abilities in the logistics system of Johnson would improve the efficiency of the system to provide more economical and scalable volume distribution operations.
Prior Art of Record
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure.
Ladden et al. (WO 2016/081794 A1) discloses a system for delivery management are provided. According to one embodiment, the system includes a manifest component configured to aggregate a plurality of items into a manifest, an identifier component configured to identify respective items within the aggregated plurality of items using the manifest, a tracking component configured to calculate a delivery route and track the plurality of items during a plurality of delivery events, and an inspection component configured to require inspection of the respective items at each of the plurality of delivery events. The delivery systems can ensure quality and manage connections between distributors and manufacturers by incorporating required checks through each step of a delivery (e.g., pick up, freight aggregation, line shipping, local shipping, etc.). Inspections at delivery transitions can be required and include each time a good (e.g., an item) is moved on or off a delivery truck, and transitions between delivery areas within specific location.
He et al., “Differentiated service policy in smart warehouse automation,” International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 56, No. 22, pp. 6956-6970 (Year: 2018) reports due to the existence of two types of variables, Alternating Minimisation method is applied to solve this joint optimisation problem. Compared with a combination of the classical turn-over rate storage assignment method and FCFS policy, the new approach yields 19.64% lower (better) objective function value with statistical significance. Numerical analysis results also indicate, as expected, that when the smart warehouse system resources become more limited, and the price difference among different classes of customer orders increases, the improvement becomes even more significant.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Patrick Kim whose telephone number is (571)272-8619. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9AM - 5PM 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, Lynda Jasmin can be reached at (571)272-6782. 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.
/Patrick Kim/Examiner, Art Unit 3628