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 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.
Claim 13 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the AS/RS shuttle" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is noted that rails for the shuttle are introduced in previous claim 12, but the shuttle is not positively recited.
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 1, 3-5 and 12-13 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gravelle (US Pub App 2018/0148259).
Regarding claim 1, Gravelle a storage grid system for automated storage and retrieval comprising
a moment frame (Fig.11A) comprising a plurality of columns and a plurality of beams, joined in a rectilinear grid (Fig.4) which defines a plurality of storage cells (10),
wherein the plurality of storage cells comprises a set of interior storage cells, wherein each interior storage cell of the set defines six faces, each face bounded by an adjacent storage cell of the plurality (Figs.1-4).
Regarding claim 3, Gravelle further discloses wherein the set of interior storage cells defines a portal frame structure within the moment frame (Figs.1-34).
Regarding claim 4, Gravelle further discloses wherein each interior storage cell defines a six-way shuttle cell (Figs.1-4).
Regarding claim 5, Gravelle further discloses wherein an AS/RS robot is configured to shuttle a payload through each of the six faces of the interior storage cell (Figs.1-4).
Regarding claim 12, Gravelle further discloses wherein each beam comprises a set of rails (26, 28) for an AS/RS shuttle (36).
Regarding claim 13, Gravelle further discloses wherein the AS/RS shuttle is positionally indexed relative to a set of column features (Fig.5).
Claims 15-16, 19-20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chen (US Pub App 2014/0182977).
Regarding claim 15, Chen discloses an automated storage and retrieval system (AS/RS) (capable of storing and retrieving) comprising:
a first column comprising a rolled tube (Fig.1);
four helical racks mounted to the first column, the four helical racks radially symmetric about a vertical axis of the first column (Fig.8); and
a set of beams comprising:
a first and second pair of beams mounted to the first column, a first plane orthogonal to the vertical axis and intersecting the first and second pairs of beams (Fig.8); and
a third and fourth pair of beams mounted to the first column, a second plane orthogonal to the vertical axis and intersecting the third and fourth pairs of beams (Fig.8),
wherein the first and second planes intersect each of the four helical racks (Fig.8).
Regarding claim 16, Chen further discloses the set of beams joins the first column to a first, second, third, and fourth column within a portal frame (Fig.8).
Regarding claim 19, Chen further discloses the portal frame defines an annular clearance region which encircles the first column between the first and second planes (Fig.8).
Regarding claim 20, Chen further discloses the system further comprises a set of diagonal braces which extend between the first and second planes, wherein the set of diagonal braces do not intersect the annular clearance region (Fig.8).
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 of this title, 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 2 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gravelle (US Pub App 2018/0148259) in view of Kahan (US Pub App 2003/0200706).
Regarding claim 2, Gravelle further discloses wherein the plurality of storage cells further defines a set of peripheral storage cells (Figs.1-4).
Gravelle does not further specifically disclose the system further comprising a set of braces which reinforce columns along the diagonals of the exterior faces of a set of peripheral storage cells.
Kahan teaches an exoskeleton system for reinforcing tall building comprising diagonal bracing members connected between vertically spaced floor beams at an angle to both the floor beams and the columns (Abstract and Fig.1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified Gravelle in view of Kahan to have a set of braces which reinforce columns along the diagonals of the exterior faces of a set of peripheral storage cells in order to provide additional support to the system.
Claims 6-8, 14 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gravelle (US Pub App 2018/0148259) in view of Chen (US Pub App 2014/0182977).
Regarding claim 6, Gravelle further discloses a first column of the plurality of columns is joined with a first, second, and third beam, a reference plane intersecting the first, second, and third beams (Fig.11a).
Gravelle does not further specifically disclose the first column comprises a set of helical racks which are radially symmetric about a long axis of the first column.
Chen teaches a vertical support structure includes a half tube and a mounting member. The half tube has an inner surface defining a receiving space and formed with a series of axially spaced-apart helical groove halves (Abstract, Para.7-9, Fig.8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified Gravelle in view of Chen to include a set of helical racks which are radially symmetric about a long axis of the first column to improve efficiency of the structure.
Regarding claim 7, Gravelle, as modified above, further teaches the first column comprises four helical racks, each bounding a respective storage cell of the plurality of storage cells (Chen, Fig.8).
Regarding claim 8, Gravelle, as modified above, further teaches wherein the set of helical racks comprises a first helical rack between the first and second beams, wherein the set of helical racks comprises a second helical rack between the second and third beams (Chen, Fig.8).
Regarding claim 14, Gravelle further discloses wherein a position of each beam joined to a first column of the plurality is indexed relative to a first hole pattern on the first column (Fig.11b).
Gravelle does not further specifically disclose wherein a set of helical racks is mounted to the first column and indexed against a second hole pattern on the column (Fig.11b).
Chen teaches a vertical support structure includes a half tube and a mounting member. The half tube has an inner surface defining a receiving space and formed with a series of axially spaced-apart helical groove halves (Abstract, Para.7-9, Fig.8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified Gravelle in view of Chen to include a set of helical racks which are radially symmetric about a long axis of the first column to improve efficiency of the structure.
Claim 11 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gravelle (US Pub App 2018/0148259) in view of Chen (US Pub App 2014/0182977) and Kirby (US Pub App 2014/0202968).
Regarding claim 11, Gravelle further discloses a first column of the plurality of columns is joined with a first, second, and third beam, a reference plane intersecting the first, second, and third beams (Fig.11a).
Gravelle does not further specifically disclose wherein the first and third beams are joined by a bolt through the first column.
Kirby teaches during the assembly of a flexible moment frame in the field and on the floor surface, a first set of load beams and cross beams are attached to the vertical posts. Opposite ends of a first load beam are attached to the first and second vertical posts, using bolts 40 (Para.29-31).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified Gravelle in view of Kirby to include a bolt joining beams through a column in order to in order to increase strength.
Gravelle does not further specifically disclose wherein the first column comprises a first helical rack mounted on the first and second beams, wherein the set of helical racks comprises a second helical rack between the second and third beams.
Chen teaches a vertical support structure includes a half tube and a mounting member. The half tube has an inner surface defining a receiving space and formed with a series of axially spaced-apart helical groove halves (Abstract, Para.7-9, Fig.8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified Gravelle in view of Chen to include a set of helical racks which are radially symmetric about a long axis of the first column to improve efficiency of the structure.
Claims 9-10 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gravelle (US Pub App 2018/0148259) in view of Tai et al (US Pub App 2003/0206789).
Regarding claim 9, Gravelle does not further specifically disclose wherein each of the columns defines an annular cross section in a first plane which is normal to a long axis of the column.
Tai teaches an automatic warehouse wherein main body supports are formed like a cylinder and have a circular cross section (Para.67).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified Gravelle in view of Tai to have each of the columns defines an annular cross section in a first plane which is normal to a long axis of the column or any main body supports to have an annular cross section since columns of annular cross section are known to offer high strength for their weight and are excellent for structural columns.
Regarding claim 10, Gravelle further suggests by the taught combination wherein each column comprises a cylindrical tube (column Gravelle Figs.1-4, Tai Para.67).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 17-18 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.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
The prior art of record fails to disclose or render obvious the claimed invention as set forth in claim 17 and subsequent dependent claims. The prior art of record does not disclose or render obvious the portal frame defines a first, second, third, and fourth cell between the first plane and the second planes, wherein an AS/RS shuttle is configurable to traverse along a path, between the first, second, third, and fourth cells, which encircles the first column.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Voloskov, Benedict, Razumov, Gravelle, Kirby and Perry-Eaton further disclose elements of discloses a storage grid system for automated storage and retrieval.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ASHLEY K ROMANO whose telephone number is (571)272-9318. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday.
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, Saul Rodriguez can be reached on 571-272-7097. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SAUL RODRIGUEZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3652
/ASHLEY K ROMANO/Examiner, Art Unit 3652