Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/198,072

ULTRAVIOLET LIGHT STERILIZING WASTE CONTAINER

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Mar 10, 2021
Examiner
SPAMER, DONALD R
Art Unit
1799
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Munchkin Inc.
OA Round
7 (Non-Final)
60%
Grant Probability
Moderate
7-8
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 60% of resolved cases
60%
Career Allow Rate
327 granted / 548 resolved
-5.3% vs TC avg
Strong +31% interview lift
Without
With
+31.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
585
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.1%
-38.9% vs TC avg
§103
48.8%
+8.8% vs TC avg
§102
14.1%
-25.9% vs TC avg
§112
29.3%
-10.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 548 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 amendments filed 2/25/2026 are acknowledged. Claims 1, 2, 4-25, 29, and 30 are pending. Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 2/25/2026 has been entered. Response to Arguments Arguments filed 2/25/2026 have been considered. The applicant argues that Lott does not teach that the light source is “disposed in a lid cover housing located in the lid cover”. The examiner disagrees. Lott shows the lid cover 14 with a housing (recess 45) in which is the UV lamp (fig 2; Column 3, lines 13-30). A housing does not need to completely enclose the lamp, but even if it did there is a protective access cover (50) over the recess 45 that completely encloses the lamp in the lid cover 14. The multi-axis sensor limitations are addressed below. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claim(s) 1, 2, 11, and 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dunn et al. (US 2018/0290828) in view of Lott (US 5,181,393). With regards to claim 1, Dunn et al. teaches a diaper pail (10), comprising: a housing (12) having an upper end and a lower end (top and bottom); a base (20) attached at the lower end; a lid assembly (14) pivotally attached by a hinge (16) to the upper end, the lid assembly having: a lid cover (top of lid 14); and an internal lid (114); and a support structure integrated and positioned within the housing and having an opening (in the middle) adapted to receive two different types of flexible hag assemblies (supports 200 and 300), the support structure has a first stationary support member having a first support surface dimensioned to seat and secure a first bag assembly (first support structure 200 accommodates single use bags), and a second stationary support member having a second support surface dimensioned to seat and secure a cassette of a second bag assembly (second support structure 300 accommodates an insertable cassette) (para [0041]-[0042]; fig 1-4). Dunn et al. teaches that the first and second support structures are vertically offset (fig 4); however, the cassette supporting second support structure is above the bag supporting first support structure. A person having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to have switched the supports as either arrangement both results in successfully providing support structures that allow a pail to use single bags or cassettes. The modification results in the second support accommodating cassettes and being vertically offset from the first support surface and that extends horizontally below the first support surface. Dunn et al. does not teach having an UV light positioned below a lid. Lott teaches a waste container, comprising a lid cover (Fig. 1, lid 14) having an ultraviolet (UV) light source (Fig. 1, UV lamp 46). Lott shows the lid cover 14 with a housing (recess 45) in which is the UV lamp (fig 2; Column 3, lines 13-30). It would be obvious to use the UV light positioning of Lott in the diaper pail of Chang in order to kill microorganisms in the waste from any angle, as taught by Lott. The combination results in the UV light being directed down onto the opening. With regards to claim 2, the combination does not teach another UV light below the support structure; however, it is an obvious change to rearrange and duplicate the UV lights because the light would predictably still shine into the diaper pail to radiate the interior and its contents, and would provide more sterilizing light to the disinfection areas. With regards to claim 11, the second bag assembly comprises a cassette adapted to dispense a flexible tubing (para [0002], para [0041]-[0042]; fig 1-4). With regards to claim 29, the UV light source is embedded (in the recess 45) into a substrate (the material of the lid 14) (fig 2). Claim(s) 4, 5, 9, and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dunn et al. (US 2018/0290828) and Lott (US 5,181,393) as applied to claims 1 and 14 above and further in view of Borowski (US 2015/0324760). With regards to claim 4, the combination does not teach UV light sources on an interior surface within the housing as claimed. Borowski teaches a waste disposal pail, wherein the UV light source is positioned on a shoulder of the interior surface within the housing (Fig. 7, UV LED device 148). It would be obvious to place a UV light source on a shoulder, as taught by Borowski, in order to ensure irradiation of all sides of the waste, as taught by Borowski. With regards to claim 5, the combination does not teach multiple UV light sources. Borowski teaches a waste disposal pail, wherein the UV light source comprises multiple UV light sources arranged in an array pattern and positioned on the interior surface of the housing (Fig. 7, UV LED device 148, para. 313). It would be obvious to place a UV light source in the bottom of the structure of Dunn, as taught by Borowski, in order to ensure irradiation of all sides of the waste, as taught by Borowski. With regards to claim 9, the combination does not teach a single use flexible bag. Borowski teaches a waste disposal pail, wherein the flexible bag assembly comprises a single use flexible bag having an attachment frame (para. 302, this would be used in the first bag assembly). It would be obvious to use a single use flexible bag of Borowski in order to make disposal easier. With regards to claim 13, the combination does not teach the wavelength of the UV light source. Borowski teaches a waste disposal pail, wherein the UV light source has a peak radiation range with wavelengths between 240-275 nm. This overlaps with the claimed range of 275-280 nm. It would be obvious to optimize the wavelength, as taught by Borowski, in order to reach the desired sterilization level. Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dunn et al. (US 2018/0290828) and Lott (US 5,181,393) as applied to claims 1 above and further in view of Cohn (WO 2013/134124). With regards to claim 6, the combination does not teach the UV light source configured to direct light onto the exterior of the bag. Cohn teaches a waste disposal pail, wherein the UV light source is configured to direct UV light upon an exterior surface area of the flexible bag assembly within the housing (para. 72). It would be obvious to shine UV light all around the bag, as taught by Cohn, in the diaper pail of Chang in order to ensure that the UV light can further disinfect what is inside the film bag as well as outside the film bag, but inside the waste disposal can, as taught by Cohn. Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dunn et al. (US 2018/0290828), Lott (US 5,181,393), and Borowski (US 2015/0324760) as applied to claim 9 above and further in view Chang (US 2018/0110893). With regards to claim 7, the combination does not teach a lid sensor as claimed. Chang discloses a diaper pail, further comprising a lid sensor that is engaged when the lid assembly is closed over the support structure (Fig. 3, sensor 510), and prevents the UV light source from being activated when the lid cover is in an open position (para. 48, 59). The sensor of Chang controls both the opening and closing of the lid, as well as the operation of the UV lamp. A person having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to have added a lid sensor as taught by Chang in order to prevent unsafe operation of the UV light. Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dunn et al. (US 2018/0290828) and Lott (US 5,181,393) as applied to claim 1 above and further in view Trapani (US 2015/0086420). With regards to claim 8, Dunn et al. teaches a door (18) but does not teach a door sensor. Trapani teaches a door sensor that is engaged when a door is closed against the housing, and prevents the UV light source from being activated when the door is in an open position (para. 14). Although Trapani is describing a door sensor on the door to a room, it serves the same function of turning off the UV light when the door is opened and would be capable of detecting the opening of a door of any size. It would be obvious to add the door sensor or Trapani to the diaper pail of Dunn in order to prevent a user from being exposed to UV radiation, as taught in Trapani. Claim(s) 10 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dunn et al. (US 2018/0290828) and Lott (US 5,181,393) as applied to claims 1 and 11 above and further in view of Cohn (WO 2013/134124) and Wilcoxen (US 2018/0194009). With regards to claim 10, the combination does not teach using a multi-layer bag to permit UV light through the bag. Cohn teaches using a flexible bag that permits the light of the UV light source therethrough to come into contact with the contents within the flexible bag (para. 72). It would be obvious to direct UV light through the bag, as taught in Cohn, in the diaper pail of Chang in order to ensure that the UV light can further disinfect what is inside the film bag as well as outside the film bag, but inside the waste disposal can, as taught by Cohn. Wilcoxen teaches a single use flexible bag that has a multi-layer composition (para. 165). It would be obvious to use a multi-layer bag in order to increase the bag’s strength, as taught by Wilcoxen. With regards to claim 12, the combination does not teach using a multi-layer bag to permit UV light through the bag. Cohn teaches using a flexible bag that permits the light of the UV light source therethrough to come into contact with the contents within the flexible bag (para. 72). It would be obvious to direct UV light through the bag, as taught in Cohn, in the diaper pail of Chang in order to ensure that the UV light can further disinfect what is inside the film bag as well as outside the film bag, but inside the waste disposal can, as taught by Cohn. Wilcoxen teaches a single use flexible bag that has a multi-layer composition (para. 165). It would be obvious to use a multi-layer bag in order to increase the bag’s strength, as taught by Wilcoxen. Claim(s) 23, 25, and 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dunn et al. (US 2018/0290828) in view of Lott (US 5,181,393) and Cohn (WO 2013/134124). With regards to claim 23, Dunn et al. teaches a diaper pail (10), comprising: a housing (12) having an upper end and a lower end (top and bottom) and a door (18); a base (20) attached at the lower end; a lid assembly (14) pivotally attached by a hinge (16) to the upper end, the lid assembly having: a lid cover (top of lid 14); and an internal lid (114); and a support structure integrated and positioned within the housing and having an opening (in the middle) adapted to receive two different types of flexible bag assemblies (supports 200 and 300), the support structure has a first stationary support member having a first support surface dimensioned to seat and secure a frame with a first flexible bag (first support structure 200 accommodates single use bags), and a second stationary support member having a second support surface dimensioned to seat and secure a cassette having a tubing packed therein (second support structure 300 accommodates an insertable cassette with tubing) (para [0002], [0041]-[0042]; fig 1-4). Dunn et al. teaches that the first and second support structures are vertically offset (fig 4); however, the cassette supporting second support structure is above the bag supporting first support structure. A person having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to have switched the supports as either arrangement both results in successfully providing support structures that allow a pail to use single bags or cassettes. The modification results in the second support accommodating cassettes and being vertically offset from the first support surface and that extends horizontally below the first support surface. Dunn et al. does not teach having an UV light positioned below a lid. Lott teaches a waste container, comprising a lid cover (Fig. 1, lid 14) having an ultraviolet (UV) light source (Fig. 1, UV lamp 46). Lott shows the lid cover 14 with a housing (recess 45) in which is the UV lamp (fig 2; Column 3, lines 13-30). It would be obvious to use the UV light positioning of Lott in the diaper pail of Chang in order to kill microorganisms in the waste from any angle, as taught by Lott. The combination results in the UV light being directed down onto the opening. The combination does not teach the UV light source configured to direct light onto the exterior of the bag. Cohn teaches a waste disposal pail, wherein the UV light source is configured to direct UV light upon an exterior surface area of the flexible bag assembly within the housing (para. 72). It would be obvious to shine UV light all around the bag, as taught by Cohn, in the diaper pail of Chang in order to ensure that the UV light can further disinfect what is inside the film bag as well as outside the film bag, but inside the waste disposal can, as taught by Cohn. With regards to claim 25, the second bag assembly comprises a cassette adapted to dispense a flexible tubing (para [0002], para [0041]-[0042]; fig 1-4). With regards to claim 30, the UV light source is embedded (in the recess 45) into a substrate (the material of the lid 14) (fig 2). Claim(s) 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dunn et al. (US 2018/0290828) in view of Lott (US 5,181,393) and Cohn (WO 2013/134124) as applied to claim 23 above and further in view of Borowski (US 2015/0324760). With regards to claim 24, the combination does not teach a single use flexible bag. Borowski teaches a waste disposal pail, wherein the flexible bag assembly comprises a single use flexible bag having an attachment frame (para. 302, this would be used in the first bag assembly). It would be obvious to use a single use flexible bag of Borowski in order to make disposal easier. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 14-22 are allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: While sensors to limit or control UV light operation to only when a door or lid is closed are generally known, they are typically some type of proximity or hall sensor. The prior art does not teach using a multi-axis sensor or accelerometer as claimed to detect the position of the lid on a UV sterilizer. The closest prior art is thus the combination of Dunn, Lott, and Chang (and Trapani) as discussed in the previous rejection of claim 21. A person having ordinary skill in the art would not have found it obvious to have used a multi-axis sensor as claimed as there is no teaching or motivation to do so particularly as the prior art tends to view simpler sensor designs as sufficient. 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 Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DONALD R SPAMER whose telephone number is (571)272-3197. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday from 9-5. 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, Michael Marcheschi can be reached at (571)272-1374. 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. /DONALD R SPAMER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1799
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 10, 2021
Application Filed
Feb 08, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jul 13, 2023
Response Filed
Sep 26, 2023
Final Rejection — §103
Dec 20, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 18, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 28, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 30, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 20, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
May 28, 2024
Examiner Interview Summary
May 29, 2024
Response Filed
Sep 21, 2024
Final Rejection — §103
Mar 12, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 14, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
May 07, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Nov 06, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 21, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Feb 25, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 03, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12582731
METHOD TO DECONTAMINATE SOLID SURFACE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576177
DEVICE AND METHOD FOR EVAPORATING VOLATILE SUBSTANCES, ESPECIALLY PERFUMES AND/OR INSECTICIDES, AND HEATING BODY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12575509
MOVABLE APPARATUS WITH AUTOMATIC/AUTONOMOUS OPERATION SLIDABLE ALONG PRE-ESTABLISHED PATHS AMONG ROWS OF VINEYARDS, FOR THE ANTI-BACTERIAL AND FUNGICIDE TREATMENT OF THE SAME VINEYARDS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12576179
VIRUS REMOVAL DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12557840
Portable Scent Dispensing Ashtray
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

7-8
Expected OA Rounds
60%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+31.2%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 548 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month