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 .
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the application filed on 3/04/2025.
Claims 1-9 are currently pending and have been examined.
Information Disclosure Statement
All references listed in the IDS documents dated 3/04/2025 and 6/13/2025 have been considered.
Title
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Interpretation
The term “handling unit” in Claim 4 is interpreted in light of at least Paragraphs 0031 and 0047 as published.
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.
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) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses 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 limitation(s) is/are: “a reader” of Claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. This term is interpreted in view of Paragraphs 0031 and 0041 as published.
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.
Claims 4-5 and 7 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.
Claim 4 contains the following limitation: “the second circuitry is configured to manage the information on the package, the information on the position, and information on the handling unit identified by the third identification information in association with each other based on the third identification information.” This limitation is indefinite in multiple ways. Firstly, it is unclear as drafted whether the terms “the information on the package” and “the information on the position” are intended to relate back to the “first identification information” and “second identification information” of Claim 1 (upon which Claim 4 depends) respectively. If not, these terms additionally lack antecedent basis. Secondly, it is unclear whether this limitation is intended to relate back to and further narrow the limitation “the second circuitry being configured to manage…” of Claim 1 (upon which Claim 4 depends) or to recite a separate and new step. For the purposes of this examination, this limitation is interpreted as “wherein the managing of information by the second circuitry additionally associates the third identification information with the first identification information and the second identification information additionally based on the third identification information.”
Claim 5 contains the following limitations: “wherein the first identification information of each of multiple packages to be collectively handled is associated with each other,” “the first circuitry is configured to read the first code of at least one of the multiple packages,” and “the second circuitry is configured to collectively manage information on each of the multiple packages based on the read first code.” These limitations are indefinite in multiple ways. Firstly, the first above-quoted limitation recites a function unconnected with any system structure in a system claim, rendering it unclear what (if any) part of the claimed system is to perform this function and, consequently, whether this unconnected function of a system claim is to be given patentable weight. Secondly, the use of the term “the first identification information” as used in these limitations (particularly the first above-quoted limitation) conflicts with the use of this term in Claim 1 (upon which Claim 5 depends). Specifically, Claim 1 specifies that this “first identification information” is specified as “identifying a package” (singular), while Claim 4 specifies that this same “first identification information” as relating to “each of multiple packages to be collectively handled.” For the purposes of this examination, these limitations will be interpreted as “the second circuitry is configured to associate the first identification information identifying the package with additional identification information identifying one or more additional packages, said one or more additional packages to be collectively handled with the package,” “the first circuitry is configured to read an additional code including the additional identification information,” and “the second circuitry is configured to collectively manage information on the package and the one or more additional packages based on the read additional code.”
Claim 7 contains the following limitation: “wherein the second circuitry is configured to allow clearing, from the memory, of the information on the package being at a predetermined position where the clearing is feasible.” This limitation is indefinite in two ways. Firstly, it is unclear as drafted whether “the information on the package being at a predetermined position” is intended to relate back to “second identification information identifying a position of the package” of Claim 1 (upon which Claim 7 depends), including specifically whether “a predetermined position” within this term of Claim 7 is intended to relate back to “a position” within this term of Claim 1. Secondly, it is unclear as drafted when “the clearing is feasible” as drafted, as “feasible” in this context is a subjective term. As such, one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing would not be apprised of when the claimed clearing is “feasible.” For the purposes of this examination, this limitation will be interpreted as “wherein the second circuitry is configured to allow clearing, from the memory, of the second information.”
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 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Regarding Claims 1, 8, and 9, the limitations of read a first code including first identification information identifying a package and a second code including second identification information identifying a position of the package; extract the first identification information and the second identification information from the first code and the second code, respectively; transmit the first identification information and the second identification information to the server; and manage information on the package identified by the first identification information and information on the position identified by the second identification information in association with each other based on the first identification information and the second identification information, as drafted, are processes that, under their broadest reasonable interpretations, cover certain methods of organizing human activity. For example, these limitations fall at least within the enumerated categories of commercial or legal interactions and/or managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II)).
Additionally, the limitations of read a first code including first identification information identifying a package and a second code including second identification information identifying a position of the package; extract the first identification information and the second identification information from the first code and the second code, respectively; transmit the first identification information and the second identification information to the server; and manage information on the package identified by the first identification information and information on the position identified by the second identification information in association with each other based on the first identification information and the second identification information, as drafted, are processes that, under their broadest reasonable interpretations, cover mental processes. For example, these limitations recite activity comprising observations, evaluations, judgments, and opinions (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)).
If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers fundamental economic principles or practices, commercial or legal interactions, managing personal behavior or relationships, or managing interactions between people, it falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind or with the aid of pen and paper but for recitation of generic computer components, it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites the additional elements of an information processing system/apparatus, a terminal device including a reader and first circuitry, a server including second circuitry, reading codes with the reader, a package, and a memory. An information processing system/apparatus, a terminal device including a reader and first circuitry, a server including second circuitry, and a memory, in the context of the claims as a whole, amount to no more than mere instructions to apply a judicial exception (see MPEP 2106.05(f)). Reading codes with a reader, in the context of the claims as a whole, amounts to no more than insignificant extra-solution activity (see MPEP 2106.05(g)). A package, in the context of the claims as a whole, amounts to no more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (see MPEP 2106.05(h)). Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract ideas into a practical application because they do not, individually or in combination, impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract ideas. The claims are therefore directed to an abstract idea.
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the judicial exception into a practical application, the additional elements amount to no more than mere instructions to apply a judicial exception, insignificant extra-solution activity, and generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use for the same reasons as discussed above in relation to integration into a practical application. The element found to recite insignificant extra-solution activity, upon reevaluation, is further determined to be well-understood, routine, and conventional as per MPEP 2106.05(d) based on the standards of 112(a), as one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing would recognize this element as such in view of the high-level description of this functionality in the original disclosure, e.g., in Paragraphs 0031, 0041, 0054, 0057, 0063, and 0102 as published. These cannot provide an inventive concept. Therefore, when considering the additional elements alone and in combination, there is no inventive concept in the claims, and thus the claims are not patent eligible.
Claims 2-7, describing various additional limitations to the system of Claim 1, amount to substantially the same unintegrated abstract idea as Claim 1 (upon which these claims depend, directly or indirectly) and are rejected for substantially the same reasons.
Claim 2 discloses wherein the second circuitry is further configured to issue codes including the first code and the second code to be read with the reader (an abstract idea in the form of a certain method of organizing human activity and a mental process), which does not integrate the claim into a practical application.
Claim 3 discloses wherein the second circuitry is configured to issue the second code including an identifier different from an identifier included in the first code (further defining the abstract idea already set forth in Claim 2), which does not integrate the claim into a practical application.
Claim 4 discloses read, with the reader, a third code including third identification information identifying a handling unit that accommodates the package (an abstract idea in the form of a certain method of organizing human activity and a mental process); extract the third identification information from the third code (an abstract idea in the form of a certain method of organizing human activity and a mental process); transmit the third identification information to the server (an abstract idea in the form of a certain method of organizing human activity and a mental process); and the second circuitry is configured to manage the information on the package, the information on the position, and information on the handling unit identified by the third identification information in association with each other based on the third identification information (an abstract idea in the form of a certain method of organizing human activity and a mental process), which do not integrate the claim into a practical application.
Claim 5 discloses wherein the first identification information of each of multiple packages to be collectively handled is associated with each other (an abstract idea in the form of a certain method of organizing human activity and a mental process); the first circuitry is configured to read the first code of at least one of the multiple packages (an abstract idea in the form of a certain method of organizing human activity and a mental process); and the second circuitry is configured to collectively manage information on each of the multiple packages based on the read first code (an abstract idea in the form of a certain method of organizing human activity and a mental process), which do not integrate the claim into a practical application.
Claim 6 discloses wherein the second circuitry is further configured to manage, in a database in the memory, information on a map indicating a position where the package is placed (an abstract idea in the form of a certain method of organizing human activity and a mental process), which does not integrate the claim into a practical application.
Claim 7 discloses wherein the second circuitry is configured to allow clearing, from the memory, of the information on the package being at a predetermined position where the clearing is feasible (an abstract idea in the form of a certain method of organizing human activity and a mental process), which does not integrate the claim into a practical application.
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.
(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 1-5 and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhu et al (CN 107832988) (hereafter, “Zhu”).
Regarding Claims 1, 8, and 9, Zhu discloses:
a terminal device including a reader and first circuitry (pgs. 2, 4; a mobile terminal is provided; scan the first product identification code by the mobile terminal);
a server including second circuitry (Abstract; pg. 2; forming a warehouse list by a server; a service end is wirelessly connected to the mobile terminal, and includes a first module storage and second module storage);
a first circuitry configured to: read, with the reader, a first code including first identification information identifying a package and a second code including second identification information identifying a position of the package (Title; pgs. 2-4, 6; Warehouse management method; Step S2: scan the first product identification code by the mobile terminal to obtain first product information of the finished product; Step S4: Scan the second product identification code by the mobile terminal to obtain second product information of all finished products in the current material bin; Step B2: after the container is placed on the shelf, the position identifier of the placement area is scanned by the mobile terminal to obtain the position information; the storage administrator may record the placement position of the material box through the mobile terminal and send the location information to the second storage, saved in module; location information of the second product also obtained in C3-C4; the first and second product identification codes may be two-dimensional codes or barcodes);
extract the first identification information and the second identification information from the first code and the second code, respectively (pgs. 2-4, 6; the codes are scanned in, e.g., S2, S4, S7, B2, C2, etc., thus extracting information);
transmit the first identification information and the second identification information to the server (pgs. 2-4, 6; a service end is wirelessly connected to the mobile terminal, and includes a first module storage and second module storage; Step S2: scan the first product identification code by the mobile terminal to obtain first product information of the finished product, and send the first product information to the first storage module for storage; Step S4: scan the second product identification code by the mobile terminal to obtain second product information of all finished products in the current material bin, and send the second product information to the first storage module, save; Step B2: after the container is placed on the shelf, the position identifier of the placement area is scanned by the mobile terminal to obtain the position information; the storage administrator may record the placement position of the material box through the mobile terminal and send the location information to the second storage); and
the second circuitry being configured to manage, in a memory, information on the package identified by the first identification information and information on the position identified by the second identification information in association with each other based on the first identification information and the second identification information (Abstract; pgs. 3, 5; associating the location information with the second product information and saving the information by the server; in step S8, the server associates the location information with the second product information; the server may associate the location information with the second product information of the material box, so that when the user of the mobile terminal searches for the product information, the finished product may be placed; the first product information or the second product information acquired is sent to the first storage module or the second storage module in the server for storage management).
Regarding Claim 2, Zhu discloses the limitations of Claim 1. Zhu additionally discloses wherein the second circuitry is further configured to issue codes including the first code and the second code to be read with the reader (pgs. 2-4, 6; Step S1, forming a first product identification code for each finished product produced; form a second product identification code on the material box; in step B1, a shelf is set in the warehouse area, and a corresponding position identifier is formed for each placement area of the shelf; Step B2: after the container is placed on the shelf, the position identifier of the placement area is scanned by the mobile terminal to obtain the position information; one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that such identification codes (such as in the disclosed embodiments of two-dimensional codes or barcodes) must be different to identify different information).
Regarding Claim 3, Zhu discloses the limitations of Claim 2. Zhu additionally discloses wherein the second circuitry is configured to issue the second code including an identifier different from an identifier included in the first code (pgs. 2-4, 6; Step S1, forming a first product identification code for each finished product produced; form a second product identification code on the material box; in step B1, a shelf is set in the warehouse area, and a corresponding position identifier is formed for each placement area of the shelf; Step B2: after the container is placed on the shelf, the position identifier of the placement area is scanned by the mobile terminal to obtain the position information; one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that such identification codes (such as in the disclosed embodiments of two-dimensional codes or barcodes) must be different to identify different information).
Regarding Claim 4, Zhu discloses the limitations of Claim 1. Zhu additionally discloses:
read, with the reader, a third code including third identification information identifying a handling unit that accommodates the package (pgs. 2-7; Step S3: assemble a predetermined number of the finished products into a material box, and form a second product identification code on the material box; Step S4: scan the second product identification code by the mobile terminal to obtain second product information of all finished products in the current material bin; Step C1: provide a shipping container, and a shipping identification code is formed on the shipping container; Step C2: scan the product outbound code through the mobile terminal to obtain outbound library information, the outbound library information and the second product information, and the outbound quantity of the product; Step C5: find the material box in the corresponding warehouse area according to the position information, and assemble the finished product into the container according to the quantity of the outbound container; the second product information includes a lot number, a product name, and a product quantity);
extract the third identification information from the third code (pgs. 2-4, 6; the codes are scanned in, e.g., S2, S4, S7, B2, C2, etc., thus extracting information);
transmit the third identification information to the server (pgs. 2-7; Step S4: scan the second product identification code by the mobile terminal to obtain second product information of all finished products in the current material bin, and send the second product information to the first storage module, save; Step C3: the mobile terminal sends the acquired second product information to the server); and
the second circuitry is configured to manage the information on the package, the information on the position, and information on the handling unit identified by the third identification information in association with each other based on the third identification information (pgs. 2-7; associating the location information with the second product information and saving the information by the server; in step S8, the server associates the location information with the second product information; the server may associate the location information with the second product information of the material box, so that when the user of the mobile terminal searches for the product information, the finished product may be placed; the first product information or the second product information acquired is sent to the first storage module or the second storage module in the server for storage management; Step C5: find the material box in the corresponding warehouse area according to the position information, and assemble the finished product into the container according to the quantity of the outbound container; in Step C6, after the pending inventory is completed, the mobile terminal sends the outbound quantity of the product to the second storage module).
Regarding Claim 5, Zhu discloses the limitations of Claim 1. Zhu additionally discloses:
wherein the first identification information of each of multiple packages to be collectively handled is associated with each other (pgs. 2-7; Step S3: assemble a predetermined number of the finished products into a material box, and form a second product identification code on the material box; Step S4: scan the second product identification code by the mobile terminal to obtain second product information of all finished products in the current material bin; Step C1: provide a shipping container, and a shipping identification code is formed on the shipping container; Step C2: scan the product outbound code through the mobile terminal to obtain outbound library information, the outbound library information and the second product information, and the outbound quantity of the product; Step C5: find the material box in the corresponding warehouse area according to the position information, and assemble the finished product into the container according to the quantity of the outbound container; the second product information includes a lot number, a product name, and a product quantity);
the first circuitry is configured to read the first code of at least one of the multiple packages (pgs. 2-7; Step S3: assemble a predetermined number of the finished products into a material box, and form a second product identification code on the material box; Step S4: scan the second product identification code by the mobile terminal to obtain second product information of all finished products in the current material bin; Step C1: provide a shipping container, and a shipping identification code is formed on the shipping container; Step C2: scan the product outbound code through the mobile terminal to obtain outbound library information, the outbound library information and the second product information, and the outbound quantity of the product; Step C5: find the material box in the corresponding warehouse area according to the position information, and assemble the finished product into the container according to the quantity of the outbound container; the second product information includes a lot number, a product name, and a product quantity); and
the second circuitry is configured to collectively manage information on each of the multiple packages based on the read first code (pgs. 2-7; associating the location information with the second product information and saving the information by the server; in step S8, the server associates the location information with the second product information; the server may associate the location information with the second product information of the material box, so that when the user of the mobile terminal searches for the product information, the finished product may be placed; the first product information or the second product information acquired is sent to the first storage module or the second storage module in the server for storage management; Step C5: find the material box in the corresponding warehouse area according to the position information, and assemble the finished product into the container according to the quantity of the outbound container; in Step C6, after the pending inventory is completed, the mobile terminal sends the outbound quantity of the product to the second storage module).
Regarding Claim 7, Zhu discloses the limitations of Claim 1. Zhu additionally discloses wherein the second circuitry is configured to allow clearing, from the memory, of the information on the package being at a predetermined position where the clearing is feasible (pgs. 3, 6; in step C6, after the pending inventory is completed, the mobile terminal sends the outbound quantity of the product to the second storage module to perform outbound inventory clearing).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu in view of Colucci III et al (US 10242333) (hereafter, “Colucci”).
Regarding Claim 6, Zhu discloses the limitations of Claim 1. Zhu does not explicitly disclose but Colucci does disclose wherein the second circuitry is further configured to manage, in a database in the memory, information on a map indicating a position where the package is placed (Column 3, lines 5-21; Column 19, lines 38-67; Column 23, lines 41-51; Figs. 3, 11; Claim 11; Claim 11; the package management system includes an inventory tracking system which tracks the location of the packages; the electronic device displays a map 1110 indicating where the packages are located in the warehouse, as illustrated by FIG. 11; the inventory management system provides the location of the sort area; the inventory tracking system is configured to provide a map for display, the map indicating a first location of the first area in the warehouse, a second location of the staging location in the warehouse, and directions from the first location to the second location).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to include the warehouse-based location storage and mapping functionalities of Colucci with the warehouse-based package tracking and management system of Zhu because the combination merely applies a known technique to a known device/method/product ready for improvement to yield predictable results (see KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421 (2007) and MPEP 2143). The known techniques of Colucci are applicable to the base device (Zhu), the technical ability existed to improve the base device in the same way, and the results of the combination are predictable because the function of each piece (as well as the problems in the art which they address) are unchanged when combined.
Discussion of Prior Art Cited but Not Applied
For additional information on the state of the art regarding the claims of the present application, please see the following documents not applied in this Office Action (all of which are prior art to the present application):
PGPub 20200311644 – “System and Method for Performing Bulk Pick of Items of a Customer Order,” Willard III et al, disclosing a system tracking and managing locations of packages in a fulfillment center and/or warehouse, in part by way of barcode scanning
PGPub 20180089616 – “Path and Load Localization and Operations Supporting Automated Warehousing Using Robotic Forklifts or Other Material Handling Vehicles,” Jacobus et al, disclosing a system for tracking and managing locations of packages in a warehouse in part by way of the scanning of codes (e.g., barcodes, QR codes, RFID signals), and effectuating the movement of such packages by way of warehouse maps
PGPub 20190287062 – “Apparatus, Systems, And Methods For Performing A Dispatched Logistics Operation For A Deliverable Item From A Hold-at-Location Logistics Facility Using A Modular Autonomous Bot Apparatus Assembly, A Dispatch Server And An Enhanced Remotely Actuated Logistics Receptacle Apparatus,” Skaaksrud et al, disclosing a system for tracking and managing locations and deliveries of packages in a hold-at-location (HAL) logistics facility
Isiqomah et al, The Implementation of Barcode on Warehouse Management System for Warehouse Efficiency, 2020 J. Phys. Conf., Vol. 1573, Ser. 1573 012038, disclosing techniques for tracking packages by way of barcode scanning
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARK C CLARE whose telephone number is (571)272-8748. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6:30am-2:30pm 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, Jeffrey Zimmerman can be reached at (571) 272-4602. 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.
/MARK C CLARE/Examiner, Art Unit 3628
/MICHAEL P HARRINGTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3628