EX1032
`
`EX1032
`
`OCADO GROUP PLC EX1032
`
`OCADO GROUP PLC EX1032
`
`

`

`International application number: GB2014052273
`Uploaded document #1 1 submitted with third party observation dated 04 Jun 2015 (04/06/2015)
`
`
`
`World Intellectual Property Organization
`34, chemin des Colombettes
`CH—1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland
`
`Oslo, 2. June 2015
`
`var ref.: Y2809NOOO/TRA
`Trond Ramsvik
`
`Deres ref.:
`
`«Third party observation» WO 2015/019055 A1
`
`1.
`
`Claim to priority: .................................................................................................................. 2
`1.1
`Same applicant or his successor in title: ........................................................................ 2
`1.2
`Same invention: .............................................................................................................. 2
`1.2.1
`Claims: .................................................................................................................... 2
`
`Figures: ................................................................................................................... 2
`1.2.2
`Description text: ...................................................................................................... 2
`1.2.3
`1.3
`Ejj‘ective filing dates: ...................................................................................................... 3
`1.3.1
`Claim 1: ................................................................................................................... 3
`1.3.2
`Claim 4: ................................................................................................................... 3
`1.3.3
`Claims 13-14: .......................................................................................................... 4
`1.3.4
`Claim 36: ................................................................................................................. 4
`1.3.5
`Claim 29 .................................................................................................................. 4
`
`2.
`
`Patentability: ......................................................................................................................... 6
`2.1
`Novelty7 ............................................................................................................................ 6
`2.1.1
`Claim 1 .................................................................................................................... 6
`2.1.2
`Claim 2 .................................................................................................................... 7
`2.1.3
`Claim 36 .................................................................................................................. 7
`
`Remaining dependent claims ................................................................................... 7
`2.1.4
`2.2
`Inventive Step .................................................................................................................. 8
`2.2.1
`Invalidpriority claim ............................................................................................... 8
`2.2.1.1
`Claim 1 and 36 ................................................................................................. 8
`2.2.1.2
`Claim 2 ............................................................................................................. 8
`2.2.1.3
`Claims 13 and 14 ............................................................................................. 9
`2.2.1.4
`Claims 15-17 .................................................................................................. 10
`
`Remaining dependent claims ......................................................................... 12
`2.2.1.5
`2.2.2
`Validpriority claim ............................................................................................... 12
`2.2.2.1
`Claims 1 and 36 ............................................................................................. 12
`2.2.2.2
`Claims 15-17 .................................................................................................. l4
`Conclusion .......................................................................................................................... 15
`
`3.
`
`
`
`OCADO GROUP PLC EX1032
`
`OCADO GROUP PLC EX1032
`
`

`

`International application number: GB2014052273
`Uploaded document #1 1 submitted with third party observation dated 04 Jun 2015 (04/06/2015)
`
`ODSOQGI’S
`
`Dear Sirs,
`
`We refer to the International Search Report (ISR) dated 15 January 2015 with the accompanying
`Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority (WO-ISA).
`
`With the exception of dependent claims 15-17 we have noted the conclusion of the Examiner that
`all claims do not fulfil the requirements of patentability.
`
`In this respect this third party observation may be Viewed as a supplement to the existing W0—
`ISA.
`
`1. Claim to priority:
`
`1.1
`Same applicant or his successor in title:
`
`We note that no UK Patents Form 21. recording any assignment of the GB application 1314313.6
`from Ocado Ltd to Ocado Innovation Ltd, has been filed at the UKIPO. Hence, if not proved
`otherwise we must assume that the entire priority claim of Ocado Innovation Ltd is invalid.
`
`With no valid assignment the effective filing date of all claims (1-42) corresponds to the international
`filing date, i.e. 24 July 2014.
`
`1.2
`
`Same invention:
`
`Irrespective of whether an assignment of the priority document GB application from Ocado Ltd to
`Ocado Innovation Ltd has been validly performed or not, the disclosure in the priority document
`and the disclosure in the PCT application PCT/GB2014/052273 do not fulfil the criteria “same
`invention".
`
`a detailed comparison between the priority document and the corresponding PCT
`After
`application we have registered the following differences 1:
`
`1.2.1 Claims:
`
`- All claims (1-42) were not present in the priority document.
`
`1.2.2 Figures:
`
`-
`—
`
`—
`
`—
`
`The entire Figure 17 in the PCT application is missing in the priority document.
`Figure 14 in the PCT application shows more details than the corresponding figure 14 in the
`priority document.
`The upper part of figure 12 in the PCT application and the upper part of figure 12 in the priority
`document is dissimilar.
`
`Figure 7 in the PCT application shows more details of the grid and the robots than the
`corresponding figure 7 in the priority document.
`
`1.2.3 Description text:
`
`-
`
`-
`
`-
`
`-
`
`The features in page 6. lines 1-9, in the PCT application have been added.
`0 Related to claim 1
`
`The features in page 6. lines 16-18, in the PCT application have been added.
`0 Related to claim 3 and 4
`
`The features in page 7. lines 7-10, in the PCT application have been added.
`0 Related to claim 13 and 14
`
`The sentence in page 7. lines 30-31, in the PCT application has been added.
`
`1 All references are made to the published PCT application WO 2015/019055 A1 and the priority
`document published in the WIPO database; Patentscope):
`
`2/15
`
`OCADO GROUP PLC EX1032
`
`OCADO GROUP PLC EX1032
`
`

`

`International application number: GB2014052273
`Uploaded document #1 1 submitted with third party observation dated 04 Jun 2015 (04/06/2015)
`
`OIWSOQGI'S
`
`0 Related to claim 32
`
`-
`
`-
`
`-
`
`-
`
`The sentence in page 8, line 6, in the PCT application has been amended by the addition of the
`word “preferably”.
`The sentence in page 8, line 7, in the PCT application has been amended by the addition of the
`word «preferably».
`The sentence in page 8, line 25, in the PCT application has been amended by the addition of the
`word «substantially».
`The features in page 8, lines 28-36, in the PCT application has been added.
`0 Related to claim 36.
`
`-
`
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`
`The sentence in page 9, lines 2-3, in the PCT application has been amended by the addition of
`the word «substantially».
`The sentence in page 10, lines 16-18, in the PCT application has been amended.
`The sentence in page 10, lines 24-25, in the PCT application has been amended.
`The sentence in page 10, lines 27-28, in the PCT application has been amended.
`The sentence in page 11, lines 1-2, in the PCT application has been added.
`The features in page 14, lines 20-38, in the PCT application have been added.
`0 Related to figure 17.
`The sentence in page 15, line 1, in the PCT application has been amended by the addition of the
`term «In any of the previously-described embodiments”.
`The sentence in page 15, line 2, in the PCT application has been amended by the addition of the
`term «For maximum stability and load capacity,».
`The features in page 15, lines 9-17, in the PCT application have been added.
`-
`
`1.3
`E ective ilin dates:
`
`-
`
`-
`
`Assuming that the above mentioned assignment has been validly performed prior to the filing of the
`PCT application we assert that the priority claims of at least the following embodiments are not valid
`since they do not fulfill the requirement of “same invention”:
`
`1.3.1 Claim 1:
`
`Claim 1 has the following wording:
`
`1. A load handling device
`for lifting and moving containers stacked in a storage system comprising a plurality of
`rails or tracks arranged in a grid pattern above the stacks of containers,
`the grid pattern
`comprising a plurality of grid spaces and each stack being located within a footprint of only a
`single grid space,
`the load handling device being configured to move laterally on the rails or tracks above the
`stacks, and
`the load—handling device comprising:
`a container-receiving space located above the rails or tracks in use and
`a lifting device arranged to lift a container from a stack into the container—receiving
`
`space;
`characterised in that
`
`the load handling device has a footprint that,
`space in the storage system.
`
`in use, occupies substantially only a single grid
`
`The term “occupies substantially only a single grid space in the storage system” cannot be
`identified directly and unambiguously from the priority document since the word “substantially”
`has been added.
`
`The effective filing date of claim 1 is therefore 24 July 2014.
`
`1.3.2 Claim 4:
`
`Claim 4 has the following wording:
`
`3/15
`
`OCADO GROUP PLC EX1032
`
`OCADO GROUP PLC EX1032
`
`

`

`International application number: GB2014052273
`Uploaded document #1 1 submitted with third party observation dated 04 Jun 2015 (04/06/2015)
`
`ODSOQGI’S
`
`4. The load handling device of Claim 3, wherein the external housing is shaped substantially as a
`cuboid.
`
`in the text of the priority
`The feature in claim 4 cannot be found, neither directly nor indirectly,
`document. Figures 5-7 show an external housing having a cuboid shape. However, since the shape is
`identical in both figures there is no support for the term “substantially as a cuboid”.
`
`The effective filing date of claim 4 is therefore 24 July 2014, both due to its dependency to previous
`claims and to the additional features in the claims in question.
`
`1.3.3 Claims 13—14:
`
`Claims 13—14 have the following wording:
`
`13. The load handling device of any of Claims 6 to 12, wherein one or more of the wheels is driven by a
`motor integrated with the wheel or located substantially adjacent to the wheel.
`
`14. The load handling device of any of Claims 6 to 14, wherein one or more of the wheels is driven by
`one or more motors located above the container-receiving space.
`
`The features in claims 13-14 cannot be found, neither directly nor indirectly, in the priority document.
`
`The effective filing date of claims 13-14 is therefore 24 July 2014, both due to their dcpcndcncics to
`previous claims and to the additional features in the claims in question.
`
`1.3.4 Claim 36:
`
`Claim 36 has the following wording:
`
`36. A storage system comprising:
`afirst set ofparallel rails or tracks and
`a second set of parallel rails or tracks extending transverse to the first set
`substantially horizontal plane toform a grid pattern comprising a plurality ofgrid spaces;
`a plurality of stacks of containers located beneath the rails and arranged such that each
`stack occupies afootprint ofa single grid space;
`a load handling device as claimed in any preceding claim, and arranged to move laterally
`above the stacks on the rails, the load handling device comprising
`a container— receiving space located above the rails and
`a lifting device arranged to lift a single containerfrom a stack into the container-
`receiving space;
`characterised in that
`
`in a
`
`the load handling device has afootprint that occupies substantially only a single grid space in the
`storage systems.
`
`The term “occupies substantially only a single grid space in the storage system” cannot be
`identified directly and unambiguously from the priority document since the word “substantially”
`has been added.
`
`The effective filing date of claim 36 is therefore 24 July 2014, both due to its dependency to previous
`claims and to the additional features in the claims in question.
`
`1.3.5 Claim 29
`
`In the priority document page 7, lines 21 -24, it is stated that “a load handling device according to
`another embodiment of the invention comprises an upper part, a lower part
`including a
`container-receiving space, and winch means for lifting a container into the container-receiving
`space. The winch means comprises a winch motor which is housed in the upper part, above the
`container-receiving space. The lower part
`includes a wheel assembly to facilitate lateral
`
`4/15
`
`OCADO GROUP PLC EX1032
`
`OCADO GROUP PLC EX1032
`
`

`

`International application number: GB2014052273
`Uploaded document #1 1 submitted with third party observation dated 04 Jun 2015 (04/06/2015)
`
`ODSOQGI’S
`
`movement of the load handling device with respect to the frame. and the upper part also includes
`at least one motorfor driving one or more wheels of the wheel assembly”.
`
`the load handling device includes all these features in
`in this particular embodiment
`Hence,
`combination, and where the winch means, the lower part and the upper part have the properties /
`configurations as specified. A skilled person has no indications that any of these properties /
`configurations should be removed / amended.
`
`In the PCT application the corresponding paragraph (see page 8, lines 4—10) has the following
`wording: a load handling device according to another embodiment of the invention comprises an
`upper part, a lower part including a container-receiving space, and winch means for lifting a
`container into the container-receiving space. The winch means preferably comprises a winch
`motor which is housed in the upper part, above the container—receiving space. The lower part
`preferablv includes a wheel assembly to facilitate lateral movement of the load handling device
`with respect to the frame, and the upper part also includes at least one motor for driving one or
`more wheels of the wheel assembly.
`
`Hence, in the PCT application the winch means of the load handling device comprising a winch
`motor housed in the upper part has been changed to optionally having such a winch motor.
`Furthermore, the lower part of the load handling device including a certain wheel assembly has
`been changed to optionally including this wheel assembly.
`
`The winch means seems to be identical to the lifting device (see e.g. priority document page 7,
`lines 5-6 and page 7, lines 22-23).
`
`Claim 29 has the following wording:
`
`29. The load handling device of Claim 28, wherein the lifting mechanism further comprises a winch
`arranged to be driven by the motor.
`
`Hence, the load handling device of claim 29 does not require a lower part that includes a wheel
`assembly to facilitate lateral movement of the load handling device with respect to the frame, and
`an upper part
`that includes at least one motor for driving one or more wheels of the wheel
`assembly. Claims 25—28, for which claim 29 is dependent on, do not require this feature neither.
`
`The effective filing date of claim 29 is therefore 24 July 2014, both due to their dependencies to
`previous claims and to a non permissible intermediate generalization of an embodiment.
`
`5/15
`
`OCADO GROUP PLC EX1032
`
`OCADO GROUP PLC EX1032
`
`

`

`International application number: GB2014052273
`Uploaded document #1 1 submitted with third party observation dated 04 Jun 2015 (04/06/2015)
`
`ODSOQGI’S
`
`2.
`
`Patentability:
`
`2.1
`
`Noveltv
`
`2.1.1 Claim 1
`
`We believe claim 1 does not fulfil the requirements of novelty for three different reasons (A—C):
`
`We agree with the Examiner that claim 1 does not fulfil the requirement of novelty in
`A:
`view of any of the publications Dl (JP H10 203647 A), D3 (DE 10 2009 0l724l Al) and D4 (DE
`199 35 742 A1) in the Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority (WO—ISA). As
`the Examiner of the EPO correctly points out, the features related the storage system must be
`ignored since claim 1 does relate to the load handling device.
`
`Any one of the publications GB 2514930 A, WO 2014/203126 A1 and WO 2014/195901
`B:
`A] shows embodiments falling under the scope of a load handling device in accordance with the
`claim. See fig. 3 in GB 2514930 A, figs. 9, 16—18 and 20 in WO 2014/203126 A1 and fig. 6 in
`WO 2014/195901 Al. These figures shows i.a. a load handling device having a footprint that, in
`use, occupies substantially only a single grid space in a storage system mentioned in the
`
`introductory part of the claim. This novelty objection is valid even if the storage system is
`(incorrectly) included in the scope of the claim.
`
`C: Patent publication WO 2014/090684 A1 (Jakob Hatteland Logistics AS), published 19 June
`2014, shows embodiments disclosing the features of the load handling device of claim 1.
`
`WO 2014/090684 A1 discloses a load handling device
`[remotely operated vehicle (1), see e.g. figures 3-5 and 8]
`suitable for lifting and moving containers stacked in a storage system comprising a plurality of
`rails or tracks arranged in a grid pattern above the stacks of containers,
`the grid pattern
`comprising a plurality of grid spaces and each stack being located within a footprint of only a
`single grid space, the load handling device being configured to move laterally on the rails or
`tracks above the stacks
`
`[the remotely operated vehicles are moveahle along both the X-axis and the Y-axis on
`rails arranged directly on vertical poles and have free access to all storage units stacked in a large
`number of parallel columns, see e.g. p. 2, lines 4-15, and figure 8] and
`the load-handling device comprising: a container-receiving space located above the rails or tracks
`in use
`
`[the vehicle comprises a container-receiving space (7) located centrally within the vehicle
`(1). The space is above the rails in use. (see e.g. figs. 3 and 8)] and
`a lifting device arranged to lift a container from a stack into the container -receiving space
`[a lifting device (9) is shown below the container-receiving space (7) and is configured to
`grab and lift/lower any underlying containers situated directly below the vehicle (see e.g. figure
`8).].
`
`in use,
`WO 2014/090684 Al also discloses that the load handling device has a footprint that,
`occupies substantially only a single grid space in a / the storage system for the following reasons:
`
`As correctly stated by the EPO the storage system is not part of the present scope of claim 1. This
`particular feature should hence be read “a single grid space in m storage system”. We may thus
`freely choose a storage system which has a footprint that fulfills the above mentioned cross
`sectional area.
`
`However, we are of the opinion that the solution disclosed in WO 2014/090684 A1 is novelty
`destroying even if the particular storage system indicated in the introductory party is (incorrectly)
`taken into account.
`
`In page 2, lines 23-32, of WO 2014/090684 A1 we find the following paragraph:
`
`6/15
`
`OCADO GROUP PLC EX1032
`
`OCADO GROUP PLC EX1032
`
`

`

`International application number: GB2014052273
`Uploaded document #1 l submitted with third party observation dated 04 Jun 20l 5 (04/06/20l 5)
`
`ODSOQGI’S
`
`“In order to allow easy entrance of the storage bin into the central cavity, its volume should be
`larger than the largest storage bin intended to be picked from the storage system. Likewise,
`the
`cross sectional area of at least one of the at least one bin receiving opening should be larger than
`the cross sectional area of the storage bin walls oriented parallel to the cavity opening(s.)”
`
`There are consequently only two restrictions limiting the cross sectional area of the vehicle:
`
`1. The volume of the central cavity should be larger than the container.
`2. The cross
`sectional area container
`receiving opening should be
`corresponding cross sectional area of the container.
`
`larger
`
`than the
`
`An exemplary embodiment of a vehicle situated on a storage system is shown in figure 8 of W0
`2014/090684 A1. In this exemplary embodiment the cross sectional area of the vehicle extends
`beyond a single grid space in one lateral direction (Y). However, this is clearly a single, non-
`limiting embodiment. Of course, many other configurations are possible;
`including the
`configuration where the cross sectional area of the vehicle is equal or less than a single grid
`space. The existence of such configurations is immediately clear for a skilled person when
`considering one of the purposes stated in W0 2014/090684 Al, to provide a more effective use of
`available space during operation (see e.g. page 1,
`lines 36—37). The skilled person is thus
`unequivocally instructed that the final configuration should minimize the operational space on the
`grid.
`
`It is hence derivable directly and unambiguously (Guidelines GL—VI 2) from WO 2014/090684
`A] that the vehicle may i.a. cover a single grid space only.
`
`Claim 1 is therefore not novel over W0 2014/090684 Al.
`
`2.1.2 Claim 2
`
`Claim 2 depends on claim 1 and has the following wording:
`
`2. The load handling device of Claim 1, wherein the load handling device comprises an
`upper part housing components (such as power components, control components, drive
`components and/0r lifting components), and a lower part
`including the container-
`receiving space, wherein the lower part is arranged directly beneath the upper part.
`
`The text in parenthesis (inserted by us) presents examples and does not form part of the scope of
`claim 2.
`
`The term upper part housing components may be any “component” such as a cover, handles
`and/or control panel. This is illustrated in egg. figure 5 of WO 2014/090684 A1.
`
`Hence, claim 2 lacks novelty in view of W0 2014/090684 Al. This applies also if claim 2 is
`further limited by “control components” and/or “lifting components”. Control panel forms part
`Of the term “control component” and the lifting device of W0 2014/090684 A1 is situated above
`the container-receiving space.
`
`2.1.3 Claim 36
`
`Claim 36 does not fulfil the requirements of novelty of reasons similar to reasons B and C
`disclosed above.
`
`2.1.4 Remaining dependent claims
`
`The features in the following dependent claims are disclosed directly and unambiguously in WO
`2014/090684 A1:
`
`Claims 3-12,
`
`7/15
`
`OCADO GROUP PLC EX1032
`
`OCADO GROUP PLC EX1032
`
`

`

`International application number: GB2014052273
`Uploaded document #1 1 submitted with third party observation dated 04 Jun 2015 (04/06/2015)
`
`ODSOQGI’S
`
`Claims 21-35.
`Claim 37 and
`Claims 39-42.
`
`2. 2
`
`Inventive SteQ
`
`In the following we will assess the inventive step of the independent claims 1 and 36 currently on
`file, and dependent claims 2, 15, 16 and 17, in accordance with two scenarios:
`
`-
`—
`
`Priority claim is invalid (Ch. 2.2.1)
`Priority claim is valid (Ch. 2.2.2).
`
`Assessment of inventive steps for dependent claims 13 and 14 will be performed considering the
`former scenario only.
`
`2.2.]
`Invalid prioritv Claim
`
`2.2.1.1 Claim 1 and 36
`
`lf, contrary to expectation, the Examiner should conclude that WO 2014/090684 A1 does not
`directly and unambiguously disclose the last feature of claim 1, we believe the requirements of
`inventive step is not fulfilled when combining WO 2014/090684 A1 with either CN103612882A
`or US20140086714A1.
`
`As explained in Ch. 2.1.1 and Ch. 2.1.3 all features of the introductory part of claim 1 and claim
`36 are explicitly disclosed in WO 2014/090684 A1.
`
`The distinguishing feature between the content of WO 2014/090684 Al and claims 1 and 36 is
`thus that the load handling device has a footprint that occupies substantially only a single grid
`space in the storage systems. The effect of this feature is to provide a more effective use of
`available space during operation, that is, an effect identical to the effect specified in page 1, lines
`36-37 of WO 2014/090684 Al. The objective technical problem may thus be formulated as; How
`to provide a more effective use of available space during operation?
`
`Both CN103612882A and US20140086714A1 would be consulted in order to find a solution to
`
`the above mentioned problem since they both disclose an apparatus for retrieving units from a
`storage system using dedicated load handling devices (abstracts).
`
`Figure 5 of CN103612882A clearly shows a load handling device occupying only a single grid
`space in the storage system.
`
`Similarly, figures 7—12 of US20140086714A1 clearly show a load handling device occupying only
`a single grid space in the storage system.
`
`There are no technical burdens for a skilled person to modify the load handling device shown in
`WO 2014/090684 A1 with the load handling device of CN103612882A or the loading handling
`device of US20140086714A1. A simple down scaling is sufficient.
`
`l-lence, claims 1 and 36 do not fulfil the requirements of inventive step when combining the
`teaching of WO 2014/090684 A1 with
`the
`teaching of
`either CN103612882A or
`US20140086714A1.
`
`2.2.1.2 Claim 2
`
`As stated previously. with the present wording claim 2 lacks novelty in View of WO 2014/090684
`A1.
`
`8/15
`
`OCADO GROUP PLC EX1032
`
`OCADO GROUP PLC EX1032
`
`

`

`International application number: GB2014052273
`Uploaded document #1 l submitted with third party observation dated 04 Jun 20l 5 (04/06/20l 5)
`
`ODSOQGI’S
`
`However, claim 2 would not be patentable even after a limitation by the components “power
`components” and “drive components”. For example, patent publication CN103612882A
`discloses a vehicle where an upper part housing contains i.a. power components and/or drive
`components.
`
`2.2.1.3 Claims 13 and 14
`
`Claims 13 and 14 depend inter alia on claim 6.
`
`Claim 6 has the following wording:
`
`6. The loading handling device of any preceding claim, wherein the load handling device
`comprises a wheel assembly comprising afirst set of wheelsfor engaging with the first set of rails
`or tracks to guide movement of the device in a first direction and a second set of wheels for
`engaging with the second set of rails or tracks to guide movement of the device in the second
`direction.
`
`the solution in WO 2014/090684 Al comprises all features of claim 6. We
`is clear that
`It
`therefore state that primary claim 6 does not fulfil
`the requirement of novelty over WO
`2014/090684 A1 and secondary that claim 6 does not fulfil the requirement of novelty over WO
`2014/090684 A1 with the exception of the last feature in claim 1.
`
`Claims 13 and 14 contain the following additional features:
`
`13. (...) one or more of the wheels is driven by a motor integrated with the wheel or located
`substantially adjacent to the wheel.
`
`14. (...) one or more ofthe wheels comprises a wheel hub motor.
`
`These features may be considered as distinguishing features in view of WO 2014/090684 A1. The
`effect of these features is to provide means for moving the vehicle in a first and second direction
`on the rails / tracks. The objective technical problem can thus be formulated as; How to achieve
`an alternative propulsion system?
`
`Optionally the distinguishing features provide the effect of increasing the stability properties of
`the load handling device (see p. 14. lines 31-34, in WO 2015/019055). The objective technical
`problem can thus optionally be formulated as; How to improve the stability of the load handling
`device?
`
`We state that the additional features of neither claim 13 nor claim 14 do fulfil the requirement of
`inventive step when combining the teaching of WO 2014/090684 A1 with common general
`knowledge.
`
`An example of relevant common general knowledge may be found in the following web-page
`from the company Techietonics:
`
`hit vzfiw ww .techietenics.corn/fiituretech 40mcsla‘irotean~elec‘trics- oeariess-direct-drive—
`
`
`
`svstam“an—invwheelwmotor—concepthtml
`
`The web-page is dated 21 March 2014. However, we may provide earlier publications upon
`request.
`
`The figures below are extracted from the web-page and show a concept where small motors are
`infused within the wheels. The wheels are intended for use in vehicles. Hence, a skilled person
`would consult such a web-page in order to solve the objective technical problem.
`
`9/15
`
`OCADO GROUP PLC EX1032
`
`OCADO GROUP PLC EX1032
`
`

`

`International application number: GB2014052273
`Uploaded document #1 1 submitted with third party observation dated 04 Jun 2015 (04/06/2015)
`
`ODSOQGI’S
`
`93mm
`
`{bmwmtk-no. , «.9 «we
`
`
`
`Furthermore, the skilled person would have no difficulties replacing the wheels shown in WO
`2014/090684 A1 with the wheels from Techietonies.
`
`If the Examiner agrees that claim 6 is not novel over WO 2014/090684 Al we may now terminate
`
`the assessment of inventive step and jump straight to the conclusion that claims 13 and 14 do not
`fulfil the reguirements of inventive step when combining the teaching of WO 2014/090684 A1
`with common general knowledge.
`
`However, if (contrary to expectation) the Examiner disagree with our finding and is of the opinion
`that the last feature of claim 1 is not found in WO 2014/090684 A1, we anyway assert that claims
`13 and 14 do not fulfil the requirements of inventive step of the following reason:
`
`The distinguishing feature
`
`-
`
`the load handling device has a footprint that occupies substantially only a single grid
`space in the storage systems
`
`has the effect of providing a more effective use of available space during operation.
`
`The distinguishing features
`
`-
`
`-
`
`one or more of the wheels is driven by a motor integrated with the wheel or located
`substantially adjacent to the wheel (claim 13), or
`one or more of the wheels comprises a wheel hub motor (claim 14)
`
`have the effect of either providing an alternative propulsion system or providing higher stability.
`
`These two effects (and corresponding problems) are independent effects, i.e., there is no synergy.
`The independent partial problems can thus be solved separately using separate combinations of
`prior art [GL G-VII 5].
`
`Hence, we assert that claims 13 and 14 do not fulfill the reguirements of inventive step when
`combining the teaching of WO 2014/090684 A1 with the teaching of either CN103612882A or
`U520140086714Al M combining the teaching of WO 2014/090684 with the teaching of
`common general knowledge.
`
`2.2.1.4 Claims 15—17
`
`Claim 15 depends inter alia on claim 6. Claims 16 depends on claim 15. Claim 17 depends on
`claim 16.
`
`Claim 6 has the following wording:
`
`10/15
`
`OCADO GROUP PLC EX1032
`
`OCADO GROUP PLC EX1032
`
`

`

`International application number: GB2014052273
`Uploaded document #1 1 submitted with third party observation dated 04 Jun 2015 (04/06/20l 5)
`
`ODSOQGI’S
`
`6. The loading handling device of any preceding claim, wherein the load handling device
`comprises a wheel assembly comprising afirst set of wheels for engaging with the first set of rails
`or tracks to guide movement of the device in a first direction and a second set of wheels for
`engaging with the second set of rails or tracks to guide movement of the device in the second
`direction.
`
`It is clear that the solution in WO 2014/090684 A1 comprises all features of claim 6.
`
`Claims 15—17 and 14 contain the following additional features:
`
`15. (...) one or more of the wheels is driven by one or more motors located above the container—
`receiving space.
`
`16. (...) further comprising drive transfer means disposed around the container-receiving space
`(suitable) for transferring drive from the motor(s) to the wheel(s).
`
`1 7. (...) the drive transfer means comprises an arrangement ofpulleys and drive belts.
`
`These features may be considered as distinguishing features in view of WO 2014/090684 Al. The
`effect of these features provides a more effective use of available space during operation (see also
`WO 2015/019055, page 6, lines 20-23). The objective technical problem may thus be formulated
`as; How to provide a more effective use of available space during operation?
`
`A skilled person is involved in constant development in his technical field [see T 774/89. T
`817/95] and preoccupied to eliminate deficiencies and achieve improvements [T 15/81]. See also
`GL F-II 4.1 and GL G-VII 3. To provide a more effective use of available space is clearly within
`the task of the skilled person.
`
`EP1037828B1 concerns a lifting device that moves on rails above a storage system (see e.g.
`[0034] and figure 2). All components are located above the container-rece