DETAILED ACTION
This communication is a first Office Action Non-Final rejection on the merits. Claims 1-11, as originally filed, are currently pending and considered below.
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 .
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged. Applicant has not complied with one or more conditions for receiving the benefit of an earlier filing date under 35 U.S.C. 120 as follows:
This application is claiming the benefit of prior-filed application No.17/841,675 under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c). Copendency between the current application and the prior application is required. Since the applications are not copending, the benefit claim to the prior-filed application is improper. Applicant is required to delete the claim to the benefit of the prior-filed application, unless applicant can establish copendency between the applications.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1 recites the following words or phrases that lack antecedent basis. This issue can often be remedied by replacing the word “the” with the word “a” when a certain claim limitation is being introduced for the first time. The following lacks antecedent basis:
the cost (claim 1, line 8);
the payment (claim 1, line 9);
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-11 are 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, the claim recites entering the product and or service in limitation (b), (c), (f) and (g). The examiner is unable to ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention because it is unclear how the method relates to the product and or service. Based on the specification, it appears as though a user enters/inputs recyclable materials into a recycling system. It is unclear how the products and or services relate to the recyclable materials. Are they the same thing? Clarification is necessary. Claims 2-11 are rejected due to their dependency from claim 1.
Regarding claim 9, the phrase "and the like" renders the claim(s) indefinite because the claim(s) include(s) elements not actually disclosed (those encompassed by "and the like"), thereby rendering the scope of the claim(s) unascertainable. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. § 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Step 1
Claims 1-11 are directed to a method. Thus, each of the claims falls within one of the four statutory categories as required by Step 1.
Step 2A, Prong One
For step 2A, the claim(s) recite(s) an abstract idea that is a method of organizing human activities and a mathematical operation. Looking at claim 1, the abstract idea is defined by the elements of the claim in bold:
A computer-implemented method for a recycling company to increase recycling demand, the computer including a processor system having at least one processor and a memory system, the computer-implemented method comprising: (a) if not already registered, registering, by the computer, a recycler with a recycling company, wherein the recycler obtains an identification;
(b) entering, by the computer, the recycler's identification to begin a transaction for a product and or service that may contain recyclable material that is not subject to a state's fee;
(c) entering, by the computer, the product and or service;
(d) processing, by the processor system, the cost of the recyclable material not subject to a state's fee;
(e) entering, at the computer, the payment for the cost of the recyclable material not subject to a state fee and a payment being less than or equal to the cost of the recyclable material that is not subject to a state fee and the payment given to a fund;
(f) evaluating, by the processor system, the cost of the product and or service and the payment for the cost of the recyclable material not subject to a state fee and the payment being less than or equal to the cost of the recyclable material that is not subject to a state fee;
(g) computing a final payment to be paid by the recycler which is the cost of the product and or service and the cost of the recyclable material not subject to a state fee and the payment being less than or equal to the cost of the recyclable material that is not subject to a state fee;
(h) confirming the transaction; and
(i) logging the transaction.
Under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims, the bold limitations above describe a concept of providing recyclers with incentives to recycle in the form of a payment or a reward. This is considered to be a method of organizing human activity relating to commercial transactions. In particular, the claims recite steps of collecting information (registering the user and entering the product or service), analyzing information (evaluating the cost of material, processing the cost to be paid to the recycler minus the cost to be given to a fund) and storing information (logging the transaction). Thus, the claims relate to managing commercial transactions in the recycling industry. Additionally, the steps recited above relates to mathematic concepts in that the claims calculate a final payment to be paid to the recycler based on the cost of the product and or service and the cost of the recyclable material and the amount of payment given to a fund. Lastly, the claims are considered to recite a mental process, as the claims recite steps that involve observations, evaluations, judgments, and opinions. The steps of registering, entering, entering, processing, entering, evaluating, computing, confirming and logging are recited at such a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind. Thus, the claims recite an abstract idea.
Step 2A, Prong Two
Next, the examiner considers whether claims 1-11 recites any additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The claims recite: a computer including a processor system having at least one processor and a memory system. The claimed computer system does not, either individually or in combination, integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Specifically, the claimed computer system is recited at such a high level of generality that it represents no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exception. Therefore, the claim as a whole is not considered to integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application of the exception.
Step 2B
If the claims are not integrated into a judicial exception, the Examiner must consider whether there is “significantly more” recited in the claim in step 2B. As noted above, the additional elements were found to represent no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exception on a computer using generic computer components. The analysis under Step 2A, Prong Two is carried through to Step 2B. Even when considered in combination, these additional elements represent mere instructions to apply an exception and therefore do not provide an inventive concept.
Dependent claims 2-9 and 11 are merely reciting further embellishment of the abstract idea and do not amount to anything that is significantly more than the abstract idea itself. In other words, none of the dependent claims recite an improvement to a technology or technical field or provide any meaningful limitations that, individually or as an ordered combination provide “significantly more.” Rather, the dependent claims are merely further reciting features that are just as abstract as independent claim 1.
Claim 10 recites the additional limitation of a winner generator is computational or physical device designed to generate a sequence of numbers or symbols that lack a pattern that selects a winner. The claimed winner generator is recited at such a high level of generality that it represents no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exception. Therefore, the claim as a whole is not considered to integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application of the exception. Moreover, the analysis under Step 2A, Prong Two is carried through to Step 2B. Even when considered in combination, these additional elements represent mere instructions to apply an exception and therefore do not provide an inventive concept.
Therefore, Claims 1-11 are directed to non-statutory subject matter and are rejected as ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dumas (US 2014/0279412).
Claim 1: Dumas describes a computer-implemented method for a recycling company to increase recycling demand, the computer including a processor system having at least one processor and a memory system [0007] (describes a computer having a processor and memory), the computer-implemented method comprising:
(a) if not already registered, registering, by the computer, a recycler with a recycling company, wherein the recycler obtains an identification [0046-48] (describes recycler registering with the system for a system identification);
(b) entering, by the computer, the recycler's identification to begin a transaction for a product and or service that may contain recyclable material that is not subject to a state's fee [0043] (describes recycler entering identification to begin a transaction);
(c) entering, by the computer, the product and or service [0043] (describes the process of entering the product or service including the recyclable materials);
(d) processing, by the processor system, the cost of the recyclable material not subject to a state's fee [Fig. 2, step 201x] (describes evaluation of the cost of materials);[0049] (describes “[0049] Next, in step s201x, the procedure includes an evaluation of the cost of the recyclable materials in step s201 (a-g), which was entered in step s200. In other words, the values of the recyclable materials are summed and can be price-adjusted or deleted. For example, if one or more items in the recyclable material is contaminated with liquids or unwanted debris, reimbursement for the contaminated item may be reduced. For example, the recycler may be reimbursed for 5 lb of uncontaminated #1 plastic at $1.00/lb. Additionally, the recycler may receive $0.80/lb for 5 lb of contaminated #1 plastic.”);
(e) entering, at the computer, the payment for the cost of the recyclable material not subject to a state fee and a payment being less than or equal to the cost of the recyclable material that is not subject to a state fee and the payment given to a fund [Fig. 2, S203;0053] (describes “ In step s203, the procedure requests for either a donation, loan, or payment (noted as dlp) and if giving a donation, loan, or payment is not desirable (following the "no" branch), the procedure proceeds to step s203a, which pays the total payment to the recycler, in step s202, which ends the transaction. In step s203, if a donation, loan, or payment was desirable, in step s204 (following the "yes" branch), the procedure requests a donation, loan, or payment (which was requested in step s203) to be entered as less than or equal to the total payment in step s202. In this embodiment, the donation, loan, or payment in step s203 is not allowed to exceed the amount that would be paid in step s202.”);
(f) evaluating, by the processor system, the cost of the product and or service and the payment for the cost of the recyclable material not subject to a state fee and the payment being less than or equal to the cost of the recyclable material that is not subject to a state fee [Fig. 2, S204;0053] (describes “In step s203, the procedure requests for either a donation, loan, or payment (noted as dlp) and if giving a donation, loan, or payment is not desirable (following the "no" branch), the procedure proceeds to step s203a, which pays the total payment to the recycler, in step s202, which ends the transaction. In step s203, if a donation, loan, or payment was desirable, in step s204 (following the "yes" branch), the procedure requests a donation, loan, or payment (which was requested in step s203) to be entered as less than or equal to the total payment in step s202. In this embodiment, the donation, loan, or payment in step s203 is not allowed to exceed the amount that would be paid in step s202.”);
(g) computing a final payment to be paid by the recycler which is the cost of the product and or service and the cost of the recyclable material not subject to a state fee and the payment being less than or equal to the cost of the recyclable material that is not subject to a state fee [Fig. 2, S205; 0054] (describes “Next, the procedure proceeds to step s205, which sends the final payment, which may be cash, deposit, or voucher. In step s205, the final payment equals the total payment in step s202 minus the amount donated, loaned, or paid by the recycler in step s204. In step s206, a recycling transaction log is created and is logged in a transaction log s206a. If registration is not desirable (following the "no" branch) in step s198, the procedure proceeds to step S200.”);
(h) confirming the transaction; and (i) logging the transaction[Fig. 2, S205; 0054] (describes “Next, the procedure proceeds to step s205, which sends the final payment, which may be cash, deposit, or voucher. In step s205, the final payment equals the total payment in step s202 minus the amount donated, loaned, or paid by the recycler in step s204. In step s206, a recycling transaction log is created and is logged in a transaction log s206a. If registration is not desirable (following the "no" branch) in step s198, the procedure proceeds to step S200.”).
2. Dumas further describes the method according to claim 1, wherein the recyclable material includes plastics, metals, mixed paper, glass, batteries, building materials, or electronic devices [0055] (describes “Step S200 may include the entry of valuable recyclable material including but not limited to the materials in step s201 (a-g), which may include plastic #1-7 s201a, metals s201b, mixed paper s201c, glass s201d, batteries s201e, building materials s201f, and electronic devices s201g. The materials in step s201 (a-g) are categorized into categories including but not limited to segregated weight (e.g., exclusively California redemption value plastic #1), commingled weight (e.g., California redemption value plastic #1 and non-California redemption value plastic #1) and count, so that the recyclables can be priced by category.”).
3. Dumas further describes the method according to claim 1 wherein the recyclable material is not subject to any of the 50 state fees in the United States of America [0091-92] (describes “uses recyclable materials for their customers that are not subject to any state fees (e.g., Ca, crv). Recyclables that are not subject to state tax will be denoted nstsf (not subject to states fees), and the companies discarding such recyclables will be noted as potential recycling waste contributors (Prwc).”).
4. Dumas further describes the method according to claim 1, presenting a selection for declining the cost of the recyclable material not subject to a state's fee [0071] (describes “FIG. 4 may contain a recycler Id window 84, recycling selection menu 86, greater than 24-oz count selection 88 with a price value, less than 24-oz count selection 90 with a price value, segregated weight selection 92 with a price value, commingled weight selection 94 with a price value, registration selection 96, receptionist spreadsheet 100a, donation and/or loan and/or payment selection 100b, delete entry selection 102, price deduction selection 104, print voucher selection 106, direct deposit selection 108, and cancel transaction selection 110.”).
5. Dumas further describes the method according to claim 1, presenting a selection for accepting the cost of the recyclable material not subject to a state's fee[0071] (describes “FIG. 4 may contain a recycler Id window 84, recycling selection menu 86, greater than 24-oz count selection 88 with a price value, less than 24-oz count selection 90 with a price value, segregated weight selection 92 with a price value, commingled weight selection 94 with a price value, registration selection 96, receptionist spreadsheet 100a, donation and/or loan and/or payment selection 100b, delete entry selection 102, price deduction selection 104, print voucher selection 106, direct deposit selection 108, and cancel transaction selection 110.”).
6. Dumas further describes the method according to claim 1, presenting a selection for adjusting the payment for the recyclable material not to be subject to a state's fee[0071] (describes “FIG. 4 may contain a recycler Id window 84, recycling selection menu 86, greater than 24-oz count selection 88 with a price value, less than 24-oz count selection 90 with a price value, segregated weight selection 92 with a price value, commingled weight selection 94 with a price value, registration selection 96, receptionist spreadsheet 100a, donation and/or loan and/or payment selection 100b, delete entry selection 102, price deduction selection 104, print voucher selection 106, direct deposit selection 108, and cancel transaction selection 110.”).
7. Dumas further describes the method according to claim 1, further comprising receiving input from the recycler for a default method of computing the payment for the recyclable material not subject to a state's fee [0105] (describes “the recycler may choose a default amount or percentage of the voluntary refund value that is to be paid into the recycling facility 24 (FIG. 1B) bank account.”).
8. Dumas further describes the method according to claim 1, wherein receiving of the input from the recycler for the default method of computing the payment for the recyclable material not subject to a state's fee occurs as part of the registration process[0105] (describes For example, when a recycler registers an account in step s198 (FIG. 2) and/or when the recycler is accessing the account once the account is registered, the recycler may choose a default amount or percentage of the voluntary refund value that is to be paid into the recycling facility 24 (FIG. 1B) bank account.”).
9. Dumas further describes the method according to claim 1, wherein the recyclable material that is not subject to a state's fee may be identified by a barcode, tracking number, qr code, and the like [0108] (describes “Not-subject-to-state-fee recyclable materials may be identified by barcodes, tracking numbers, qr codes, and the like.”).
10. Dumas further describes the method according to claim 1, wherein the transaction is processed within a winner generator for selecting a winner and wherein the winner generator is computational or physical device designed to generate a sequence of numbers or symbols that lack a pattern [0087] (describes “entering the transaction log s206a into a winner generator 500. The winner generator 500 may be a random-number generator (RNG), which is a computational or physical device designed to generate a sequence of numbers or symbols that lack a pattern, i.e., appear random, that are well known throughout the industry. The winner generator may scan transaction log s206a for specific information, retrieving that information and then performing certain computations and/or physical procedures with that information in order to select a participating recycler to be the winner for the raffles and/or prizes. The amount of winners selected may not be limited to just one; winners may win more than once or only once per raffle and/or prizes.”).
11. Dumas further describes the method according to claim 10, wherein the winner may win more than once[0087] (describes “entering the transaction log s206a into a winner generator 500. The winner generator 500 may be a random-number generator (RNG), which is a computational or physical device designed to generate a sequence of numbers or symbols that lack a pattern, i.e., appear random, that are well known throughout the industry. The winner generator may scan transaction log s206a for specific information, retrieving that information and then performing certain computations and/or physical procedures with that information in order to select a participating recycler to be the winner for the raffles and/or prizes. The amount of winners selected may not be limited to just one; winners may win more than once or only once per raffle and/or prizes.”).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Frybarger (US 2015/0144012), which relates to an interactive waste receptacle that incentivizes recycling.
Paz et al., (US 20120029980), which describes a method for collecting recycling materials and providing the user with rewards programs in the form of cash, coupons, sweepstakes entries and points on a coupon, card, or otherwise stored with the user's information.
Shaw et al., (US20080041996), which describes methods for processing recyclable containers and providing financial incentives.
Shuster-Arechiga et al., (US 2014/0214505), which describes a method that identifies recycling or other environmentally beneficial activities and provides the user with easily understood data about the environmental impact of such activities. The activities are measured and may be used to provide incentives for recycling, such as credits for online applications, positions on a leaderboard, identification of recycling achievements on social networking sites, and financial and other rewards.
Siranart, Aphinya, The Lottery Scheme to Boost Plastic Recycling – In it to Win it, 2021 [online], [retrieved on 2025-09-02]. Retrieved from the Internet <URL https://www.undp.org/thailand/blog/lottery-scheme-boost-plastic-recycling-it-win-it>
PNG
media_image1.png
18
19
media_image1.png
Greyscale
, which describes utilizing a lottery scheme to boost recycling.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JULIE MEYERS SHANKER whose telephone number is (571)270-5460. The examiner can normally be reached Monday and Tuesday 10:00am- 6:00pm EST.
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, Nate C Uber can be reached at (571) 270-3923. 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.
JULIE MEYERS. SHANKER
Examiner
Art Unit 3689
/JULIE M SHANKER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3626