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 .
Claim Objections
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-6, 10-15, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Griggs U.S. Patent No. 11,518,629.
Claim 1, Griggs teaches a conveyor system 110 operating method 500 executed by one or more processors 111, the method comprising: obtaining, from a sensor system 130,140 of a conveyor system 110, a first distance between a front end of the conveyor system 110 and at least one object 112 positioned in front of the conveyor system 110; determining that the first distance via 111 is less than a first predefined distance; and in response to the first distance being less than the first predefined distance, controlling the conveyor system 110 to move to increase a distance from the at least one object 112 C2 L40-67; C3 L1-10.
Claim 2, Griggs teaches determining that the first distance is less than the first predefined distance comprises comparing a measured value of the first distance to the first predefined distance C5 L48-67; C6 L1-5.
Claim 3, Griggs teaches the first predefined distance comprises a user selected value C11 L45-67; C12 L1-5.
Claim 4, Griggs teaches controlling the conveyor system 110 comprises sending instructions to one or more motor controllers 111 that cause the conveyor system 110 to retract until the first distance is equal to or greater than the first predefined distance C11 L45-67; C12 L1-5.
Claim 5, Griggs teaches the conveyor system 110 is an extendable conveyor system that comprises a first conveyor segment 114a and a second conveyor segment 114b configured to nest underneath the first conveyor segment 114a, and wherein the one or more motor controllers 111 control relative movement between the first conveyor segment 114a and the second conveyor segment 114b Fig. 2 C9 L30-55.
Claim 6, Griggs teaches the first distance is the shortest distance between the front end of the conveyor system 110 and a plurality of objects 112 via 111 C10 L50-67; C11 L1-45.
Claim 10, Griggs teaches obtaining, from at least a first side mounted sensor 132 of the sensor system 130,140, a second distance between a first side of the conveyor system 110 and a second object 112; obtaining, from a second side mounted sensor 134 of the sensor system 130,140, a third distance between the second side of the conveyor system 110 and a third object 112; determining that a difference between the second distance and the third distance via 111 exceeds a threshold difference value; and in response, controlling the conveyor system 110 to move such that the difference is within the threshold difference value C10 L50-67; C11 L1-25.
Claim 11, Griggs teaches the conveyor system 110 comprises an interface for connecting a robot 100b to the conveyor system 110; wherein obtaining the first distance comprises obtaining the first distance from the robot 100b through the interface C7 L34-67.
Claim 12, Griggs teaches obtaining package flow data via 111 indicating a rate package flow along the conveyor system 110; and controlling via 111, based on the package flow data, operation of independent indexing sections of the conveyor system 110 C8 L45-65.
Claim 13, Griggs teaches controlling via 111 the operation of the independent indexing sections 114 comprises controlling at least one independent indexing section 114 to adjust buffering distances between packages 112 by varying the speed of the at least one independent indexing section via 111.
Claim 14, Griggs teaches an extendable conveyor system 110 comprising: a plurality of conveyor segments 114 interlocked in a telescoping configuration with individual conveyor segments 114 at least partially overlapping one another Fig. 2; a conveyor extension/retraction system operatively coupled to at least one of the conveyor segments 114 and configured to control the extension and retraction of the extendable conveyor system 114 by controlling movement of the conveyor segments 114 relative to one another C9 L30-55; and a control system 111 in electrical communication with the conveyor extension/retraction system of 110 and configured to perform operations comprising adjusting a position of one or more conveyor segments 114 responsive to data received from a package handling robot 100b in electronic communication with the control system 111 C11 L25-45.
Claim 15, Griggs teaches conveyor segment 114 comprises one or more indexing sections 114a, and wherein the operations comprise controlling a speed of one indexing section 114a independent from other indexing sections 114b,c responsive to second data received from the package handling robot 110 C15 L20-40.
Claim 19, Griggs teaches a extendable conveyor system 110 comprising: a plurality of conveyor segments 114a-c interlocked in a telescoping configuration with individual conveyor segments 114a-c at least partially overlapping one another; a conveyor extension/retraction system of 110 via 111 operatively coupled to at least one of the conveyor segments 114 and configured to control the extension and retraction of the extendable conveyor system 110 by controlling movement of the conveyor segments 114 relative to one another C9 L30-55; a sensor system 130,140; and a control system 111 in electrical communication with the conveyor extension/retraction system 110 and with the sensor system 130,140, the control system 111 configured to perform operations comprising: obtaining, from a sensor system 130,140 of a conveyor system 110, a first distance between a front end of the conveyor system 110 and at least one object 112 positioned in front of the conveyor system 110; determining that the first distance via 111 is less than a first predefined distance; and in response to the first distance being less than the first predefined distance, controlling the conveyor system 110 to move to increase a distance from the at least one object 112 C2 L40-67; C3 L1-10.
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.
Claim(s) 7-9 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Griggs U.S. Patent No. 11,518,629 in view of Zuzga U.S. Patent No. 11,375,738.
Claim 7, Griggs does not teach as Zuzga teaches controlling the front end 455 of the conveyor system 301 to move laterally relative to a length of the conveyor system 301 Fig. 10 C5 L29-50. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to combine the transport disclosed in Griggs with the conveyor configuration taught in Zuzga with a reasonable expectation of success because
Claim 8, Griggs does not teach as Zuzga teaches controlling the front end 455 of the conveyor system 301 to move laterally comprises moving the front end 405 in response to measurement data from the sensor system 485 C7 L44-67; C8 L1-10. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to combine the transport disclosed in Griggs with the conveyor configuration taught in Zuzga with a reasonable expectation of success because
Claim 9, Griggs does not teach as Zuzga teaches controlling the front end 455 of the conveyor system 301 to move laterally comprises sending instructions to one or more motor controllers that control lateral movement of the conveyor system 301 in response to measurement data from the sensor system 485 C7 L44-67; C8 L1-10. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to combine the transport disclosed in Griggs with the conveyor configuration taught in Zuzga with a reasonable expectation of success because
Claim 16, Griggs does not teach as Zuzga teaches a forward most conveyor segment 307 of the plurality of conveyor segments 301 Fig. 10 comprises an articulating end 455 configured to pivot relative to the forward most conveyor segment 307 C5 L29-50. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to combine the transport disclosed in Griggs with the conveyor configuration taught in Zuzga with a reasonable expectation of success because
Claim 17, Griggs does not teach as Zuzga teaches a base conveyor segment 303 of the plurality of conveyor segments 301 Fig. 12 comprises a package stop configured to raise and lower responsive to control signals from the control system Figs. 11-12 C7 L45-67. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to combine the transport disclosed in Griggs with the conveyor configuration taught in Zuzga with a reasonable expectation of success because
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 18 and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAVEL SINGH whose telephone number is (571)272-2362. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8am-6pm.
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, Gene Crawford can be reached at (571) 272-6911. 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.
/KAVEL SINGH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3651
KS
Prosecution Insights