DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 6/20/2025 has been entered. Claims 57-73 and 75-76 remain pending in the application. Claims 1-56 and 74 were cancelled.
Claim Objections
Claims 57 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 57, line 6, “an FPD” should be “the FPD” to avoid 112b issues.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 57-66, 72-73 and 75 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sanglier (US 20140283660 A1) in view of Clavelloux (FR 2943263 A1) and Kleczewski (US 20160103084 A1).
Regarding claim 57, Sanglier teaches a method for the disassembly of a flat panel display wherein the flat panel display is an FPD, wherein the FPD comprises a display screen provided on a front face of the FPD and a housing which accommodates the display screen and associated electronic circuitry (abstract), the apparatus comprising:
(i) a cutting step for receiving an FPD, the cutting station being configured and arranged for a cutting step including to make cuts into the FPD along cutting paths which permit detachment of an entirety of the display screen, or a cut-out sub-unit of the display screen, from the FPD (abstract, see Figure 3),
(ii) an FPD characterisation step provided in advance of, or at, the cutting station, the FPD characterization step being adapted to measure and/or log one or more characterising parameters or identifiers of the FPD in advance of the cutting step (paragraph 0036, 0090 and 0091),
(iii) a data processing step in data communication with the FPD characterisation step, the data processing system being adapted to receive one or more of said characterising parameters or identifiers, and attempt to derive therefrom an appropriate cutting protocol for cutting into the FPD, and provide instructions in accordance with the cutting protocol which are sent back to the cutting station so as to control the cuts (cutting the FPD base on the gathered information, paragraph 0095-0097),
Sanglier fails to teach apparatus including a cutting station and an FPD charaterisation station, and a data processing system, characterised in that the FPD characterisation station comprises a weigh station adapted to weigh the FPD so as to obtain a measured weight value for the FPD, which measured weight value serves as one characterising parameter of the one or more characterising parameters or identifiers of the FPD.
Clavelloux teaches a machine for cutting FPD including a cutting station (1, see Figure 2) and an FPD charaterisation station (via determination means 32, page 8 of translation, lines 358-369), and a data processing system (via computer means, page 9 of translation, lines 392-401).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the method of Sanglier in the device of Clavelloux, as taught by Clavelloux, in order to allow the FPD to be better destroyed and recycled (page 2, lines 52-63 of the Clavelloux translation).
Modified Sanglier still fails to teach characterised in that the FPD characterisation station comprises a weigh station adapted to weigh the FPD so as to obtain a measured weight value for the FPD, which measured weight value serves as one characterising parameter of the one or more characterising parameters or identifiers of the FPD.
Kleczewski teaches a measuring conveyor with a weigh station (30, see Figure 2).
It would have been obvious to ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of modified Sanglier to add the measuring conveyor with a weigh station, as taught by Kleczewski, in order better obtain information of FPD (getting weight information for determine the next step of operation, page 12-13, lines 565-585, translation of Clavelloux). The resulting device of modified Sanglier teaches characterised in that the FPD characterisation station comprises a weigh station adapted to weigh the FPD so as to obtain a measured weight value for the FPD, which measured weight value serves as one characterising parameter of the one or more characterising parameters or identifiers of the FPD (as modified by Kleczewski, added weight station for better collecting information of FPD).
Regarding claim 58, modified Sanglier further teaches the measured weight value is sent to the data processing system, the measured weight value being compared with an associated FPD database which comprises known FPD weights so as to obtain one or more candidate FPD matches based upon identical weight, or closest weight, thereby determining the appropriate cutting protocol for cutting into the FPD (as modified by Kleczewski, using weight data to compare with known data base of data, paragraph 0040 and 0133 of Sanglier).
Regarding claim 59, modified Sanglier further teaches the FPD database is preloaded with cutting path instructions for a range of known FPDs, and wherein the FPD database further comprises one or more stored characterising parameters or identifiers of each of the known FPDs (cutting step based on the known data base, paragraph 0040 and 0133-0139 of Sanglier).
Regarding claim 60, modified Sanglier further teaches the data processing system is adapted to compare one or more characterising parameters or identifiers obtained from the characterisation station for a characterised FPD with one or more counterpart characterising parameters or identifiers stored in the FPD database so as to identify a matching stored FPD or in the absence of this a null result (known data base, paragraph 0040 and 0133 of Sanglier).
Regarding claim 61, modified Sanglier further teaches in the event of a matching stored FPD, the data processing system retrieves the appropriate cutting protocol for cutting into the characterised FPD and sends instructions in accordance with the cutting protocol to the cutting station (cutting step based on the known data base, paragraph 0040 and 0133-0139 of Sanglier).
Regarding claim 62, modified Sanglier further teaches the FPD characterisation station comprises an optical scanner (as modified in claim 57, camera, paragraph 0102 of Sanglier)..
Regarding claim 63, modified Sanglier further teaches the optical scanner is adapted to measure one or more dimensional variables of the FPD (as modified in claim 57, camera, paragraph 0102 of Sanglier).
Regarding claim 64, modified Sanglier further teaches the one or more dimensional variables comprises one or more of: a FPD housing width, a FPD housing length, a FPD housing diagonal extent, a visible display screen width, a visible display screen length, and/or a visible display screen width extent (as modified in claim 57, scanning step, paragraph 0107 of Sanglier).
Regarding claim 65, modified Sanglier further teaches the one or more dimensional variables is/are compared to corresponding known FPD dimensional variables provided in the FPD database, so as to permit matching based upon identical, or closest, dimensional variable(s), with the appropriate cutting protocols paths thereby being retrieved (as modified in claim 57, scanning step in order to determine the parameter of the FPD, paragraph 0107 and 0112 of Sanglier).
Regarding claim 66, modified Sanglier further teaches the optical scanner's measured dimensional variables concern the disposition of the display screen within the front face of the FPD, so as to determine appropriate cutting paths directly from the FPD itself (as modified in claim 57, scanning step in order to determine the parameter of the FPD, paragraph 0107 and 0112 of Sanglier).
Regarding claim 72, modified Sanglier further teaches the FPD has a visible unique identifier on an external surface of the FPD and the characterisation station comprises a visible identifier reader comprising a camera or scanner (as modified in claim 57, camera, paragraph 0102 of Sanglier).
Regarding claim 73, modified Sanglier further teaches the visible identifier reader obtains the unique identifier from the FPD and compares this with each entry of a pre-populated database of said identifiers (as modified in claim 57, bar code corresponding with data, paragraph 0121 of Sanglier).
Regarding claim 75, modified Sanglier further teaches a process for the disassembly of flat panel display units, the process comprising:
providing the apparatus in accordance with claim 57;
characterising the FPD at the FPD characterisation station (as modified in claim 57, abstract of Sanglier and using the device of Clavelloux);
retrieving a cutting protocol from the data processing system (as modified in claim 57, abstract of Sanglier and using the device of Clavelloux); and
cutting the FPD in accordance with the cutting protocol at the cutting station (as modified in claim 57, abstract of Sanglier and using the device of Clavelloux).
Claims 67-71 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sanglier (US 20140283660 A1) in view of Clavelloux (FR 2943263 A1) and Kleczewski (US 20160103084 A1) and in further view of Hisano (US 20160267443 A1).
Regarding claim 67, modified Sanglier teaches all elements of the current invention as set forth in claim 57 stated above.
Modified Sanglier fails to teach in the event or a null match, or a match outside of a pre-determined acceptable tolerance, the characterisation parameter(s) or identifier(s) obtained are used to populate a new database entry for that FPD.
Hisano teaches data creation device for making a new library (abstract).
It would have been obvious to ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of modified Sanglier to add new entry creation operation, as taught by Hisano, in order better obtain information data base for FPD (abstract of Hisano).
Regarding claim 68, modified Sanglier further teaches the data processing system instigates the characterisation station to obtain further parameters and/or identifiers beyond those obtained when arriving at the null result, and wherein these are stored in said new database entry for the FPD (as modified in claim 67, making new entry, paragraph 134 and 140-141 of Hisano).
Regarding claim 69, modified Sanglier further teaches upon determination of an unknown FPD by the null result, the data processing system prompts the creation of a new cutting protocol for the unknown FPD (as modified in claim 67, making new entry, paragraph 134 and 140-141 of Hisano).
Regarding claim 70, modified Sanglier further teaches the new cutting protocol is created using scanned dimension and configuration information obtained from an optical scanner of the FPD characterisation station (as modified in claim 67, making new entry, paragraph 134 and 140-141 of Hisano).
Regarding claim 71, modified Sanglier further teaches the new cutting protocol is provided at least in part by manual operator measurement and data entry (as modified in claim 67, making new entry, paragraph 134, 140-141 and 0145 of Hisano).
Claim 76 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sanglier (US 20140283660 A1) in view of Clavelloux (FR 2943263 A1) and Masuda (US 20180326590 A1).
Regarding claim 76, Sanglier teaches an method for the disassembly of a flat panel display, wherein the flat panel display is an FPD, wherein the FPD comprises a display screen provided on a front face of the FPD and a housing which accommodates the display screen and associated electronic circuitry (abstract), the apparatus comprising:
(i) a cutting step for receiving an FPD, the cutting station being configured and arranged for a cutting step including to make cuts into the FPD along cutting paths which permit detachment of an entirety of the display screen, or a cut-out sub-unit of the display screen, from the FPD (abstract, see Figure 3),
(ii) an FPD characterisation step provided in advance of, or at, the cutting station, the FPD characterisation station being adapted to measure and/or log one or more characterising parameters or identifiers of the FPD in advance of the cutting step (paragraph 0036, 0090 and 0090),
(iii) a data processing step in data communication with the FPD characterisation step, the data processing system being adapted to receive one or more of said characterising parameters or identifiers, and attempt to derive therefrom an appropriate cutting protocol for cutting into the FPD, and provide instructions in accordance with the cutting protocol which are sent back to the cutting station so as to control the cuts (cutting the FPD base on the gathered information, paragraph 0095-0097).
Sanglier fails to teach an apparatus including a cutting station and an FPD charaterisation station, and a data processing system, wherein the cutting station comprises a cutting tool, and wherein the cutting station comprises a means for rotating the FPD about a vertical rotation axis or for rotating the orientation of the cutting tool with respect to the FPD.
Clavelloux teaches a machine for cutting FPD including a cutting station (1, see Figure 2) and an FPD charaterisation station (via determination means 32, page 8 of translation, lines 358-369), and a data processing system (via computer means, page 9 of translation, lines 392- 401).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the method of Sanglier in the device of Clavelloux, as taught by Clavelloux, in order to allow the FPD to be better destroyed and recycled (page 2, lines 52-63 of the Clavelloux translation).
Modified Sanglier still fails to teach wherein the cutting station comprises a means for rotating the FPD about a vertical rotation axis or for rotating the orientation of the cutting tool with respect to the FPD.
Masuda teaches an apparatus including the cutting station comprises a means for rotating the work piece about a vertical rotation axis or for rotating the orientation of the cutting tool with respect to the work piece (see Figure 32ab).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of modified Sanglier to change the cutting tool and support table arrangement, as taught by Masuda, in order to cut more different shapes (paragraph 0217 of Masuda).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/20/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Examiner notes that although the remarks filed on 6/20/2025, page 7, stated that claim 57 is cancelled, since the claim 57 is still listed as (Currently Amended), claim 57 is still treated as required.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See /n re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). In this instant case Sanglier teaches the process of using a cutting step, first reading the characteristic of the FPD and collected data (which can be data related to the FPD), then compare the collected data with the data base for cutting protocol, then cut the FPD, then Clavellous is used to teach the cutting station, characterization station and data processing system structure, then Kleczewski teach how to collected weight data. The modified device of modified Sanglier teaches using collected weight data for the comparison of the figuring out what cutting protocol to use, since one of ordinary skill in the art understand weight data can be used to identify a FPD.
In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971). In this case Sanglier teaches the process of using a cutting step, first reading the characteristic of the FPD and collected data (which can be data related to the FPD), then compare the collected data with the data base for cutting protocol, then cut the FPD, in here the “data” can be anything desired by the end used, as long as the data can distinguish the FPD from each other (example model X has abc feature, while model Y has def features, so that the correct cutting protocol can be performed. Then, Clavellous is rely upon to teach a type of cutting station for cutting FPD, with data collected and process, and lastly Kleczewski is only rely upon for the teaching of known method of collecting weight data. The reasoning is provide in reference, a reasonable combination of the teaching references provide is not hindsight, it is with in the level of skill of one of ordinary skill in the art.
Furthermore, MPEP 2041.03 states that “A person of ordinary skill in the art is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an automaton”, thus if one of ordinary skill in the art would want to collect whatever type of data deem necessary (in this case, the added weight data) for analysis to identify the FPD for the correct cutting operation.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 76 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LIANG DONG whose telephone number is (571)270-0479. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8 AM-6 PM.
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, Adam Eiseman can be reached on 571-270-3818. 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.
/LIANG DONG/Examiner, Art Unit 3724 9/04/2025