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 .
This Office Action is in response to the applicant’s response to the election filing on 03/24/2026.
Claims 13 and 19 are withdrawn for being drawn to a non-elected species. Claims 1-12, 14-18, and 20 are pending and examined below.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species 1, the embodiment shown in Figure 1, and Sub-Species A, the embodiment shown in Figure 1, in the reply filed on 03/24/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 13 and 19 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species and sub-species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 03/24/2026.
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 plurality of digits as stated in claim 5 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 Objections
Claims 15 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 15 line 4, the phrase “providing to an actuator a control signal” should be written as “providing, to an actuator, a control signal” in order to clearly indicated that the control signal is the feature being provided.
Regarding claim 20 line 5, the phrase “providing to an actuator a control signal” should be written as “providing, to an actuator, a control signal” in order to clearly indicated that the control signal is the feature being provided.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by reference Bastian, II et al. (8,276,739)(referred Bastian).
Regarding claim 15, Bastian disclose a method comprising the steps of:
moving a surface (124) or receptacle to a position associated with item retrieval; and
monitoring one or more pickup zones,
providing, to an actuator (1202), a control signal to move the surface (124) or receptacle,
wherein the control signal increases or decreases the speed at which the surface (124) or receptacle is moved based on an output signal from a plurality of sensors (col 16 ln 52) monitoring the one or more pickup zones
(Figure 18 and Column 14 lines 43-17, Column 16 lines 11-17, 49-53)
In column 16 lines 49-53, Bastian disclose the surface (124) are moved so that the next item to be picked up is conveyed to the pickup position. The sensors are disclosed to confirm the next item to be picked up is in the pickup position. Therefore, the actuator is interpreted to increase the speed of the surface when the sensor doesn’t detect the item, and the actuator is interpreted to decrease and stop the speed of the surface when the sensor does detect the item.
Regarding claim 16, Bastian disclose the output from the plurality of sensors (col 16 ln 52) is based on computer vision, weight sensor, and/or radio frequency. (Column 16 lines 49-53)
Regarding claim 17, Bastian disclose the control signal slows down, stops, or increases the surface of a conveyor belt. (Bastian – Column 5 lines 61-67, Column 16 lines 11-17, 49-53)
Regarding claim 18, Bastian disclose the control signal causes a notification to slow down and stop a rate at which items are provided to the surface (124) or receptable to be provided. (Bastian – Column 18 lines 11-20)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-6, 9-12, 14, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference Bastian, II et al. (8,276,739)(referred Bastian) in view of reference Neiser (9,481,518).
Regarding claim 1, Bastian disclose a system (1800) comprising:
an actuator (1202) configured to move a surface (124) or receptacle to a position associated with item retrieval; and
a plurality of sensor (col 16 ln 52) configured to monitor one or more pickup zones,
wherein the actuator (1202) is configured to increase or decrease the speed at which items (120) are provided to the one or more pickup zones based on an output signal from the plurality of sensors (col 16 ln 52).
(Figure 18 and Column 14 lines 43-17, Column 16 lines 11-17, 49-53)
In column 16 lines 49-53, Bastian disclose the surface (124) are moved so that the next item to be picked up is conveyed to the pickup position. The sensors are disclosed to confirm the next item to be picked up is in the pickup position. Therefore, the actuator is interpreted to increase the speed of the surface when the sensor doesn’t detect the item, and the actuator is interpreted to decrease and stop the speed of the surface when the sensor does detect the item.
Bastian discloses the process of picking and processing orders is automatic and the sensors provide information of the condition of the system. This implies the system has a device that is configured to receive information from the sensor and provide commands to the other parts of the system based on said information. However, Bastian do not explicitly disclose a processor coupled to the actuator and the plurality of sensors.
Neiser discloses a system (100) comprising: a conveyance structure (114); and a processor (120), wherein the processor (120) is configured to provide a control signal to the conveyance structure (114). (Figure 1 and Column 3 lines 19-23, Column 4 lines 27-39, 45-53)
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention, in order for the system of Bastian to operate automatically and based on the function of the sensors, the system must have a processor configured to provide a control signal to the actuator based on an output from the plurality of sensors.
Regarding claim 2, Bastian modified by Neiser disclose the output from the plurality of sensors (Bastian – col 16 ln 52) is based on computer vision, weight sensor, and/or radio frequency. (Bastian – Column 16 lines 49-53)
Regarding claim 3, Bastian modified by Neiser disclose a controller (Bastian – col 7 ln 37) associated with a robotic retrieval device (Bastian – 416). (Bastian – Column 7 lines 36-38)
Regarding claim 4, Bastian modified by Neiser disclose robotic retrieval device (Bastian – 416) includes a robotic arm (Bastian – 506) to retrieve one or more items (Bastian – 120) form the one or more pick-up zones and to place the one or more items (Bastian – 120) in a receptable (Bastian – 118). (Bastian – Column 7 lines 44-47, Column 14 lines 53-54, 59-62)
Regarding claim 5, Bastian modified by Neiser disclose the robotic arm (Bastian – 506) includes a gripper (Bastian – 508) having a plurality of digits. (Bastian – Column 7 lines 44-52)
Regarding claim 6, Bastian modified by Neiser disclose the robotic arm (Bastian – 506) uses suction, friction, electrostatic force, or magnetic force to pick up items (Bastian – 120). (Bastian – Column 7 lines 44-50)
Regarding claim 9, Bastian disclose the surface (124) are moved so that the next item to be picked up is conveyed to the pickup position. The sensors are disclosed to confirm the next item to be picked up is in the pickup position. (Column 16 lines 49-53)
Therefore, Bastian modified by Neiser is interpreted to disclose the control signal slows down and stop the speed of the surface when the sensor does detect the item.
Regarding claim 10, Bastian modified by Neiser disclose the surface is a conveyor belt. (Bastian – Column 5 lines 61-67)
Regarding claim 11, Bastian modified by Neiser disclose the control signal causes a notification to slow down and stop a rate at which items are provided to the surface (Bastian – 124) or receptable to be provided. (Bastian – Column 18 lines 11-20)
Regarding claim 12, Bastian disclose the surface (124) are moved so that the next item to be picked up is conveyed to the pickup position. The sensors are disclosed to confirm the next item to be picked up is in the pickup position. (Column 16 lines 49-53)
Therefore, Bastian modified by Neiser is interpreted to disclose the control signal increases the speed of the surface when the sensor doesn’t detect the item.
Regarding claim 14, Bastian modified by Neiser disclose the items (Bastian – 120) to be included in the receptable (Bastian – 118) are determined based on data associated with an invoice, an order, a part list, and/or a pack list. (Bastian – Column 5 lines 25-29)
Regarding claim 19, Bastian disclose a system (1800) configured to:
move a surface (124) or receptacle to a position associated with item retrieval; and
monitor one or more pickup zones,
provide, to an actuator (1202), a control signal to move the surface (124) or receptacle,
wherein the control signal increases or decreases the speed at which the surface (124) or receptacle is moved based on an output signal from a plurality of sensors (col 16 ln 52) monitoring the one or more pickup zones
(Figure 18 and Column 14 lines 43-17, Column 16 lines 11-17, 49-53)
In column 16 lines 49-53, Bastian disclose the surface (124) are moved so that the next item to be picked up is conveyed to the pickup position. The sensors are disclosed to confirm the next item to be picked up is in the pickup position. Therefore, the actuator is interpreted to increase the speed of the surface when the sensor doesn’t detect the item, and the actuator is interpreted to decrease and stop the speed of the surface when the sensor does detect the item.
Bastian discloses the process of picking and processing orders is automatic and the sensors provide information of the condition of the system. This implies the system has a device that is configured to receive information from the sensor and provide commands to the other parts of the system based on said information. However, Bastian do not explicitly disclose a processor coupled to the actuator and the plurality of sensors.
Neiser discloses a system (100) comprising: a conveyance structure (114); and a processor (120), wherein the processor (120) is configured to execute instruction to affect a result in the system. (Figure 1 and Column 3 lines 19-23, Column 4 lines 27-39, 45-53)
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention, in order for the system of Bastian to operate automatically and based on the function of the sensors, the system must have computer instructions that instruct a processor to operate the system.
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference Bastian, II et al. (8,276,739)(referred Bastian) in view of reference Neiser (9,481,518) as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of reference Kim et al. (9,782,902).
Regarding claim 7, Bastian modified by Neiser disclose the claimed invention as stated above, but do not disclose the gripper is interchangeable.
Kim et al. disclose a gripper (1) that is replaceable or changeable depending on attributes of objects that the gripper will engage. (Column 10 lines 65-67)
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention, to have modified the gripper of Bastian by incorporating the interchangeable gripper as taught by Kim et al., since column 10 liens 62-64 of Kim et al. would allow the gripper to have a various shapes and pieces.
Regarding claim 8, Bastian modified by Neiser and Kim et al. disclose the attributes of the item include weight, fragility, compressibility, rigidity, size, and/or shape. (Kim et al. – Column 10 lines 65-67)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK B FRY whose telephone number is (571)272-0396. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Thur 7am-4pm.
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, Shelley Self can be reached at (571) 272-4524. 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 B FRY/Examiner, Art Unit 3731 April 3, 2026
/SHELLEY M SELF/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3731
Prosecution Insights