DETAILED ACTION
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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 January 5th, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on January 5th, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 3, 12, 15 and 17-19 have been amended. Claims 6-8 have been canceled. Claims 1-5, 9 and 12-20 remain pending. Applicant’s amendments to the claims overcome the objections previously set forth in the Final Office Action mailed October 3rd, 2025.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 15 is dependent upon claim 6 which has previously been canceled. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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 1-5, 9, 13-17 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walsh et al. (US 5443164) in view of Parr et al. (US 2019/0217342).
Regarding claim 1, Walsh et al. (US 5443164) teaches an automated segregation unit (Col. 1 lines 6-11), comprising:
one or more feeders (Fig. 1 #16) to receive a stream of mixed waste to be segregated (Col. 4 lines 6-9), the stream of mixed waste comprising plastic (Col. 1 lines 6-11);
one or more optical decision makers (Fig. 1 #44) operatively coupled to the one or more feeders (Col. 4 lines 6-16, 55-57),
the one or more optical decision makers (Fig. 1 #44) are integrated with a first vision system (Fig. 1 #22, 24), the first vision system configured to:
scan the stream of mixed waste in real-time (Col. 4 lines 21-29) at a pre-defined frame rate and/or scanning rate (Col. 6 lines 1-8, 21-26);
create a material profile of wastes in the mixed waste (Col. 7 lines 33-62) based on one or more pre-defined identity parameters of the wastes (Col. 11 lines 22-29);
compare each of the identity parameter of the material profile with one or more look-up tables containing one or more standard profiles to identify different kinds of materials in the mixed waste (Col. 12 lines 46-49); and
categorize identified materials into one or more categories in real-time on the basis of the comparison (Col. 4 lines 34-57, Col. 12 lines 46-49);
one or more optical sorters (Fig. 1 #64) functionally coupled to the one or more optical decision makers (Fig. 1 #64 functionally coupled to #44), the optical sorter (Fig. 1 #64) configured to physically segregate the categorized materials from the stream of mixed waste (Col. 4 lines 62-68);
a plurality of storage units (Fig. 1 #70) to collect respective categories of segregated materials (Col. 5 lines 1-5); and
a transport means (Fig. 1 #46) operationally coupled to the one or more feeders (Fig. 1 #46 operationally coupled to #16), the one or more optical decision makers (Fig. 1 #46 operationally coupled to #44), the one or more optical sorters (Fig. 1 #46 operationally coupled to #64) and the plurality of storage units (Fig. 1 #46 operationally coupled to #70) for transporting at least one of the mixed waste and/or segregated materials (Col. 4 lines 58-62), wherein each transport means comprises one or more conveyor belts (Fig. 2 see conveyor belt of #46);
wherein, the one or more optical decision makers (Fig. 1 #44) instructs the one or more optical sorters (Fig. 1 #64) to eject the categorized materials to its respective storage unit (Fig. 1 #70, Col. 4 line 62-Col. 5 line 5).
Walsh et al. (US 5443164) lacks teaching the stream of mixed waste comprising plastic, paper, films, glass, rubber, metal, and electronic waste, wherein, the one or more optical decision makers set a priority of ejection of the one or more categories of the categorized materials in real-time based upon abundance and/or economic value of the one or more categories of the categorized materials in the mixed waste, wherein the abundance and/or economic value are determined continuously and updated in real-time; a plurality of transport means operationally coupled to the one or more feeders; and wherein, the one or more optical decision makers instructs the one or more optical sorters to eject the categorized materials to its respective storage unit according to the priority.
Parr et al. (US 2019/0217342) teaches an automated segregation unit (Paragraph 0002 lines 1-6) comprising the stream of mixed waste comprising plastic, paper, films, glass, rubber, metal, and electronic waste (Paragraph 0003 lines 1-9, Paragraph 0018 lines 1-10, Paragraph 0019 lines 1-10), wherein, the one or more optical decision makers (Fig. 3 #302) set a priority of ejection of the one or more categories of the categorized materials in real-time based upon abundance and/or economic value (Paragraph 0076 lines 1-38, Paragraph 0078 lines 1-6) of the one or more categories of the categorized materials in the mixed waste, wherein the abundance and/or economic value are determined continuously and updated in real-time (Paragraph 0076 lines 1-10, 33-38); a plurality of transport means (Paragraph 0056 lines 1-7) operationally coupled to the one or more feeders (Paragraph 0067 lines 1-13); and wherein, the one or more optical decision makers (Fig. 3 #302) instructs the one or more optical sorters to eject the categorized materials to its respective storage unit according to the priority (Paragraph 0046 lines 1-14, Paragraph 0076 lines 33-38).
Parr et al. (US 2019/0217342) explains that multiple conveyors are used to conduct waste streams between various sorting mechanisms, and the conveyors can be equipped with sensors which report information regarding the flow of materials, and the control system may adjust the operating parameters of each conveyor to help manage the sorting facility (Paragraph 0056 line 1-Paragraph 0057 line 13). Parr et al. (US 2019/0217342) explains that a solid waste stream may come from residential or commercial settings, a secondary commodity recycling, construction waste, industrial waste, etc. and may include materials useful for secondary purposes, wherein the material recovery facility is able to separate the materials by size, physical characteristic, and chemical makeup to maximize the amount of commodity that can be recovered, and minimizing the amount of material that is sent to a landfill (Paragraph 0019 lines 1-19). Finally, Parr et al. (US 2019/0217342) explains that the central control system can identify and classify individual and composite objects, and adjust the principal sorting logic and components of the system, in real time, in response to increase throughput and efficiency, maximize or optimize the amount of materials that are recovered, the purity of the final products, and to create different types of residual or recovered components for use in specific applications, and the facility can accept solid waste streams of fluctuating compositions and dynamically reconfigure the various material handling units in real time to target varying types of materials, to optimize recovery from the varying streams and to balance workload across the material handling units (Paragraph 0076 lines 1-10, 33-38), wherein the system can be adjusted to recover the highest possible value stream (Paragraph 0078 lines 1-6).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Walsh et al. (US 5443164) to include the stream of mixed waste comprising plastic, paper, films, glass, rubber, metal, and electronic waste, wherein, the one or more optical decision makers set a priority of ejection of the one or more categories of the categorized materials in real-time based upon abundance and/or economic value of the one or more categories of the categorized materials in the mixed waste, wherein the abundance and/or economic value are determined continuously and updated in real-time; a plurality of transport means operationally coupled to the one or more feeders; and wherein, the one or more optical decision makers instructs the one or more optical sorters to eject the categorized materials to its respective storage unit according to the priority as taught by Parr et al. (US 2019/0217342) in order to separate multiple different waste materials which may be recovered for secondary purposes, therefore minimizing the amount of waste sent to landfills, to transfer waste between multiple different sorting mechanisms, and to dynamically reconfigure the various material handling units in real time to target varying types of materials therefore optimizing recovery from the waste streams and recovering the highest possible value stream.
Regarding claim 2, Walsh et al. (US 5443164) teaches the automated segregation unit as claimed in claim 1, wherein the feeder (Fig. 1 #16) includes a feeding rate (Col. 5 lines 9-12).
Regarding claim 3, Walsh et al. (US 5443164) lacks teaching the automated segregation unit as claimed in claim 1, wherein the one or more optical decision makers act based upon a data given by a plurality of feedback sensors, thereby, in case of any malfunction, the user is not required to manually identify the cause and switch off the entire plant.
Parr et al. (US 2019/0217342) teaches an automated segregation unit (Paragraph 0002 lines 1-6), wherein the one or more optical decision makers (Fig. 3 #302) act based upon a data given by a plurality of feedback sensors (Paragraph 0067 lines 8-21), thereby, in case of any malfunction, the user is not required to manually identify the cause and switch off the entire plant (Paragraph 0068 lines 1-13).
Parr et al. (US 2019/0217342) explains that facility environmental sensors may be in communication with central control system to enable the central control system to effectively manage the various systems to help optimize the operation (Paragraph 0067 lines 15-21), monitor the status of the various components to ensure proper operation, monitoring service intervals, and determination/alerting when a malfunction or other anomaly is detected (Paragraph 0068 lines 1-13).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Walsh et al. (US 5443164) to include wherein the one or more optical decision makers act based upon a data given by a plurality of feedback sensors, thereby, in case of any malfunction, the user is not required to manually identify the cause and switch off the entire plant as taught by Parr et al. (US 2019/0217342) in order to ensure proper operation of the segregation unit.
Regarding claim 4, Walsh et al. (US 5443164) lacks teaching the automated segregation unit as claimed in claim 3, wherein the feedback sensors include near infrared sensors, X-ray sensors, Red Green Blue visible spectrum/hyperspectral/spectral sensors/cameras or a combination thereof.
Parr et al. (US 2019/0217342) teaches an automated segregation unit (Paragraph 0002 lines 1-6), wherein the feedback sensors (Paragraph 0067 lines 8-21) include near infrared sensors, X-ray sensors, Red Green Blue visible spectrum/hyperspectral/spectral sensors/cameras or a combination thereof (Paragraph 0069 lines 1-11, Paragraph 0071 lines 1-17).
Parr et al. (US 2019/0217342) states that facility environmental sensors may include laser measurement devices that report volumetric characteristics of the material stream (Paragraph 0069 lines 1-11), and may include a visible light camera, NIR spectrometer, or ultraviolet light camera to determine whether a screen is operating at its best efficiency (Paragraph 0071 lines 1-17). Parr et al. (US 2019/0217342) explains that facility environmental sensors may be in communication with central control system to enable the central control system to effectively manage the various systems to help optimize the operation (Paragraph 0067 lines 15-21)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Walsh et al. (US 5443164) to include wherein the feedback sensors include near infrared sensors, X-ray sensors, Red Green Blue visible spectrum/hyperspectral/spectral sensors/cameras or a combination thereof as taught by Parr et al. (US 2019/0217342) in order to ensure proper operation of the segregation unit.
Regarding claim 5, Walsh et al. (US 5443164) lacks teaching the automated segregation unit as claimed in claim 3, wherein the feedback sensors are operatively coupled to the transport means.
Parr et al. (US 2019/0217342) teaches an automated segregation unit (Paragraph 0002 lines 1-6), wherein the feedback sensors (Paragraph 0067 lines 8-21) are operatively coupled to the transport means (Paragraph 0067 lines 15-21).
Parr et al. (US 2019/0217342) explains that the metering system supplies the central control system with parameters relevant to the operation of the system, and the central control system may slow or accelerate the rate of infeed material based on the parameters in order to help optimize the operation of the system (Paragraph 0067 lines 8-21).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Walsh et al. (US 5443164) to include wherein the feedback sensors are operatively coupled to the transport means as taught by Parr et al. (US 2019/0217342) in order to slow or accelerate the objects on the transport means and therefore optimize the operation of the system.
Regarding claim 9, Walsh et al. (US 5443164) teaches the automated segregation unit as claimed in claim 1, wherein the optical sorters (Fig. 1 #64) includes at least one ejection means in the form of a mechanical unit with suction and/or ejection abilities (Col. 4 lines 58-62).
Regarding claim 13, Walsh et al. (US 5443164) teaches the automated segregation unit as claimed in claim 1, wherein the transport means (Fig. 1 #46) includes a transport rate (Col. 11 line 66-Col. 12 line 4).
Regarding claim 14, Walsh et al. (US 5443164) lacks teaching the automated segregation unit as claimed in claim 13, wherein the transport rate is controlled based upon density and/or volume per unit area of the mixed objects present on the transport means.
Parr et al. (US 2019/0217342) teaches an automated segregation unit (Paragraph 0002 lines 1-6), wherein the transport rate is controlled based upon density and/or volume per unit area of the mixed objects present on the transport means (Paragraph 0067 lines 8-21).
Parr et al. (US 2019/0217342) explains that the metering system supplies the central control system with parameters relevant to the operation of the system, such as the amount of waste being accepted into the system, and the central control system may slow or accelerate the rate of infeed material based on the parameters in order to help optimize the operation of the system (Paragraph 0067 lines 8-21).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Walsh et al. (US 5443164) to include wherein the transport rate is controlled based upon density and/or volume per unit area of the mixed objects present on the transport means as taught by Parr et al. (US 2019/0217342) in order to slow or accelerate the objects on the transport means according to the amount of objects being transported, and therefore optimize the operation of the system.
Regarding claim 15, Walsh et al. (US 5443164) teaches the automated segregation unit as claimed in claim 6, wherein the first vision system (Fig. 1 #22, 24) compares the absorption, transmittance and/or florescence of the waste in the mixed waste (Col. 7 lines 33-62) with one or more look-up tables containing a characteristic value corresponding to pre-defined materials to identify the different kinds of materials in the mixed waste (Col. 12 lines 46-49).
Regarding claim 16, Walsh et al. (US 5443164) teaches the automated segregation unit as claimed in claim 1, wherein, the optical sorter (Fig. 1 #64) is integrated with a second vision system (Fig. 1 #62) configured to identify the categorized material before segregation (Col. 4 lines 58-66).
Regarding claim 17, Walsh et al. (US 5443164) teaches a method of operating an automated segregation unit (Col. 1 lines 6-11), the method comprises:
a. scanning, in real-time, a stream of mixed waste by one or more optical decision maker (Fig. 1 #44, Col. 4 lines 10-33, 42-55), the stream of mixed waste comprising plastic (Col. 1 lines 6-11);
b. creating a material profile of wastes in the mixed waste (Col. 7 lines 33-62) based on one or more pre-defined identity parameters of the wastes (Col. 11 lines 22-29);
c. comparing each of the identity parameter of the material profile of the wastes with one or more look-up tables containing one or more standard profiles to identify different kinds of materials in the mixed waste (Col. 12 lines 46-49);
d. categorizing the identified materials in the scanned stream of mixed waste into one or more categories in real-time by the one or more optical decision makers (Col. 4 lines 55-57) based upon the comparison (Col. 4 lines 34-57, Col. 12 lines 46-49);
f. instructing one or more optical sorter (Fig. 1 #64) to eject the materials (Col. 4 lines 62-68), the instruction being communicated by the optical decision maker (Fig. 1 #44, Col. 4 lines 62-68);
g. ejecting each category of the categorized materials from the stream of mixed waste by at least one ejection means (Col. 4 line 62-Col. 5 line 5); and
h. collecting respective categories of ejected recyclable materials from step g (Col. 5 lines 1-5) by a plurality of storage units (Fig. 1 #70).
Walsh et al. (US 5443164) lacks teaching the stream of mixed waste comprising plastic, paper, films, glass, rubber, metal, and electronic waste, e. prioritizing, in real-time, the categorized materials from step d by the one or more optical decision makers based upon abundance and/or economic value of the one or more categories of the categorized materials, wherein the abundance and/or economic value are determined and continuously updated in real-time; and f. instructing one or more optical sorter to eject the prioritized materials from step e.
Parr et al. (US 2019/0217342) teaches a method of operating an automated segregation unit (Paragraph 0002 lines 1-6), the method comprises:
a. scanning, in real-time, a stream of mixed waste by one or more optical decision maker (Paragraph 0046 lines 1-14, Fig. 3 #302), the stream of mixed waste comprising plastic, paper, films, glass, rubber, metal, and electronic waste (Paragraph 0003 lines 1-9, Paragraph 0018 lines 1-10, Paragraph 0019 lines 1-10);
e. prioritizing, in real-time, the categorized materials from step d by the one or more optical decision makers based upon abundance and/or economic value (Paragraph 0076 lines 1-38, Paragraph 0078 lines 1-6) of the one or more categories of the categorized materials, wherein the abundance and/or economic value are determined and continuously updated in real-time (Paragraph 0076 lines 1-10, 33-38); and
f. instructing one or more optical sorter to eject the prioritized materials from step e (Paragraph 0046 lines 1-14, Paragraph 0076 lines 33-38).
Parr et al. (US 2019/0217342) explains that multiple conveyors are used to conduct waste streams between various sorting mechanisms, and the conveyors can be equipped with sensors which report information regarding the flow of materials, and the control system may adjust the operating parameters of each conveyor to help manage the sorting facility (Paragraph 0056 line 1-Paragraph 0057 line 13). Parr et al. (US 2019/0217342) explains that a solid waste stream may come from residential or commercial settings, a secondary commodity recycling, construction waste, industrial waste, etc. and may include materials useful for secondary purposes, wherein the material recovery facility is able to separate the materials by size, physical characteristic, and chemical makeup to maximize the amount of commodity that can be recovered, and minimizing the amount of material that is sent to a landfill (Paragraph 0019 lines 1-19). Finally, Parr et al. (US 2019/0217342) explains that the central control system can identify and classify individual and composite objects, and adjust the principal sorting logic and components of the system, in real time, in response to increase throughput and efficiency, maximize or optimize the amount of materials that are recovered, the purity of the final products, and to create different types of residual or recovered components for use in specific applications, and the facility can accept solid waste streams of fluctuating compositions and dynamically reconfigure the various material handling units in real time to target varying types of materials, to optimize recovery from the varying streams and to balance workload across the material handling units (Paragraph 0076 lines 1-10, 33-38), wherein the system can be adjusted to recover the highest possible value stream (Paragraph 0078 lines 1-6).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Walsh et al. (US 5443164) to include the stream of mixed waste comprising plastic, paper, films, glass, rubber, metal, and electronic waste, e. prioritizing, in real-time, the categorized materials from step d by the one or more optical decision makers based upon abundance and/or economic value of the one or more categories of the categorized materials, wherein the abundance and/or economic value are determined and continuously updated in real-time; and f. instructing one or more optical sorter to eject the prioritized materials from step e as taught by Parr et al. (US 2019/0217342) in order to separate multiple different waste materials which may be recovered for secondary purposes, therefore minimizing the amount of waste sent to landfills, to transfer waste between multiple different sorting mechanisms, and to dynamically reconfigure the various material handling units in real time to target varying types of materials therefore optimizing recovery from the waste streams and recovering the highest possible value stream.
Regarding claim 19, Walsh et al. (US 5443164) teaches the method as claimed in claim 17, wherein before ejecting the one or more categorized materials the optical sorter (Fig. 1 #64) scans the stream of mixed waste (Fig. 1 #62, Col. 4 lines 62-66) to identify the categorized recyclable materials (Col. 4 lines 58-66).
Regarding claim 20, Walsh et al. (US 5443164) teaches the method as claimed in claim 17, wherein the identity parameter includes type, mass, dimensions, color, shape, volume, texture, size, absorption, transmittance, florescence or a combination thereof (Col. 4 lines 34-41).
Claims 12 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walsh et al. (US 5443164) in view of Parr et al. (US 2019/0217342) and further in view of Kim (KR 101262221).
Regarding claim 12, Walsh et al. (US 5443164) lacks teaching the automated segregation unit as claimed in claim 1, wherein the storage units includes a capture mechanism which aids in collecting/guiding the one or more categories of the categorized materials into the respective storage unit from the transport means, wherein the capture mechanism comprises one of: a pivoting flap, a slidable door, a rocking panel, or a pneumatic ejection.
Kim (KR 101262221) teaches an automated segregation unit (Paragraph 0001 lines 1-3), wherein the storage units (Fig. 2 #160) includes a capture mechanism (Fig. 6 #161) which aids in collecting/guiding the one or more categories of the categorized materials into the respective storage unit (Fig. 6 #161 aids in collecting/guiding objects into #160) from the transport means (Fig. 6 #113), wherein the capture mechanism comprises one of: a pivoting flap (Fig. 6 #161, Paragraph 0089 lines 4-5), a slidable door, a rocking panel, or a pneumatic ejection.
Kim (KR 101262221) explains that the container unit is equipped with a container gate which automatically stores the plastic components sorted by the first and second sorting units (Paragraph 0075 lines 1-3), wherein the container gate of a storage unit of a specific component is opened so that the final sorting result guided through the transport means is automatically stored in the container (Paragraph 0076 lines 1-4).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Walsh et al. (US 5443164) to include wherein the storage units includes a capture mechanism which aids in collecting/guiding the one or more categories of the categorized materials into the respective storage unit from the transport means, wherein the capture mechanism comprises one of: a pivoting flap, a slidable door, a rocking panel, or a pneumatic ejection as taught by Kim (KR 101262221) in order to automatically store the objects in a storage unit.
Regarding claim 18, Walsh et al. (US 5443164) lacks teaching looping remaining category of materials via a plurality of transport means to eject the remaining category of materials in the plurality of storage units by following step a to h.
Kim (KR 101262221) teaches the method of operating the automated segregation unit (Paragraph 0001 lines 1-3), wherein the method further comprises: looping remaining category of materials via a plurality of transport means (Fig. 2 #150, 151, 152, 153, Paragraph 0071 lines 1-2) to eject the remaining category of materials in the plurality of storage units by following step a to h (Paragraph 0072 lines 1-7, Paragraph 0064 line 1-7, Paragraph 0091 lines 1-8, Paragraph 0075 lines 1-3).
Kim (KR 101262221) explains that the control unit generally assigns the highest priority to the component which accounts for the largest amount of material (Paragraph 0085 lines 1-3). Kim (KR 101262221) states that because multiple selections are performed in a time-division order determined by the components, the final selection purity can be maximized (Paragraph 0017 lines 73-75). Kim (KR 101262221) additionally explains that since the residual objects remaining after the first or second screening are circulated through the recovery unit, there is an advantage that a variety of objects can be screened by component using only the minimum number of detection sensors to increase the screening purity (Paragraph 0017 lines 76-80).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Walsh et al. (US 5443164) to include looping remaining category of materials via a plurality of transport means to eject the remaining category of materials in the plurality of storage units by following step a to h as taught by Kim (KR 101262221) in order to assign the highest priority to the component with the most amount of material and in order to recirculate remaining objects through the segregation unit, therefore maximizing the purity of the sorted components.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed January 5th, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant's argument that Walsh is completely unrelated to the claimed invention since the claimed invention is directed towards categorizing and sorting different recyclable materials and Walsh is directed towards sorting plastic containers, a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. The teachings of Walsh would be relevant to sorting of different recyclable materials in addition to plastic, and further would be capable of categorizing and sorting multiple recyclable materials had the system been modified as recited above.
Regarding the Applicant’s argument that Walsh fails to teach or suggest the first vision system configured to…create a material profile…based on one or more pre-defined identity parameters…compare each of the identity parameter of the material profile…with one or more look-up tables containing one or more standard profiles to identify different kinds of materials, the Examiner would like to clarify the following. Walsh states that the image processors process the video data to produce a stream of data values that are then normalized to consider the sensitivity of each camera, therefore creating a material profile of wastes in the mixed waste based on identity parameters of the wastes, and explains that the image processing may entail a three-dimensional lookup table used to identify the proper sorting classification, therefore comparing the identity parameters with one or more look-up tables containing standard profiles to identify different kinds of materials and categorizing the identified material into one or more categories based upon the comparison (Col. 7 lines 33-62, Col. 11 lines 61-65, Col. 12 lines 46-49).
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection(s) of amended claim(s) 1 and 17 under 35 U.S.C. 103 in view of Kim have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Parr et al. (US 2019/0217342).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Molly K Devine whose telephone number is (571)270-7205. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:00-4:00.
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 McCullough can be reached at (571) 272-7805. 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.
/MOLLY K DEVINE/ Examiner, Art Unit 3653