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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on May 13th, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-2, 4-5, 9, 12, 15-20 have been amended. Claims 22-23 have been added. Claims 1-5, 9, 12-20 and 22-23 remain pending.
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 17-20 and 22-23 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.
Claim 17 recites an additional step “c” after step “d”, wherein it appears that the second step “c” should instead recite step “e.”
Claim 18 recites the limitation "step a to e". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, as claim 17 did not recite step “e”.
Claims 19-20 and 22-23 are unclear as they are dependent upon claim 17.
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, 19-20 and 22-23 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:
a transport means (Fig. 1 #46) for transporting a stream of mixed waste to be segregated (Col. 4 lines 6-9, 58-62), wherein the transport means comprises one or more conveyor belts (Col. 4 lines 58-62), 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 transport means (Fig. 1 #44 operatively coupled to #46),
the optical decision maker (Fig. 1 #44) being integrated with a first vision system (Fig. 1 #22, 24), the first vision system comprising a database comprising one more standard profiles including pre-configured values of one or more pre-defined identity parameters (Col. 10 lines 65-68, Col. 11 lines 30-60, Col. 12 lines 46-49), the first vision system (Fig. 1 #22, 24) 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) by capturing a predefined number of frames per unit time (Col. 6 lines 1-8);
create a material profile of the stream of mixed waste present in the frame as scanned by the first vision system (Col. 7 lines 33-62) based on one or more identity parameters (Col. 10 lines 31-64), the identity parameter comprises at least one of a chemical characteristic and a physical characteristic (Col. 10 lines 31-36);
compare each of the identity parameter of the material profile with the pre-configured values of the pre-defined identity parameters of the standard profiles to identify different kinds of materials in the mixed waste (Col. 10 lines 60-68, Col. 12 lines 46-49); and
categorize identified materials into one or more categories in real-time (Col. 4 lines 34-57, Col. 11 lines 1-6, 34-60); and
one or more optical sorters (Fig. 1 #64) functionally coupled to the optical decision maker (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).
Walsh et al. (US 5443164) lacks teaching a plurality of transport means, wherein each transport means comprises one or more conveyor belts, the stream of mixed waste comprising plastic, paper, films, glass, rubber, metal, and electronic waste, and a first vision system including one of an AI powered vision system, or a NIR/IR camera-based vision system.
Parr et al. (US 2019/0217342) teaches an automated segregation unit (Paragraph 0002 lines 1-6) comprising a plurality of transport means (Paragraph 0056 lines 1-7), wherein each transport means comprises one or more conveyor belts (Paragraph 0056 lines 1-7), 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), and a first vision system (Fig. 3 #306) including one of an AI powered vision system, or a NIR/IR camera-based vision system (Paragraph 0083 lines 3-6).
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 an optical sorter may be able to distinguish between fibers and film/plastics using characteristics such as reflectivity/absorption of certain wavelengths, such as infrared (Paragraph 0083 lines 3-6), and states that using a combination of one or more of size, density, shape characterizations, visual and infrared identification, and automated quality control stations, human staffed positions can be minimized and the plant can be dynamically configured to accommodate waste streams of a fluctuating nature and composition, thereby allowing the plant to be operated more efficiently over longer periods of time and techniques such as machine vision and object recognition, potentially fed by different sensor technologies such as IR, UV, visible light, magnetic, chemical, and similar such sensors, to increase separation accuracy to further maximize recovery of separated recyclable waste streams and increase value thereof (Paragraph 0025 lines 4-22).
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 a plurality of transport means, wherein each transport means comprises one or more conveyor belts, the stream of mixed waste comprising plastic, paper, films, glass, rubber, metal, and electronic waste, and a first vision system including one of an AI powered vision system, or a NIR/IR camera-based vision system as taught by Parr et al. (US 2019/0217342) in order to separate waste streams of a fluctuating nature and composition which may be recovered for secondary purposes, therefore minimizing the amount of waste sent to landfills, and to transfer waste between multiple different sorting mechanisms.
Regarding claim 2, Walsh et al. (US 5443164) teaches the automated segregation unit as claimed in claim 1, wherein the automated segregation unit includes one or more feeders (Fig. 1 #16) operationally coupled to the transport means (Fig. 1 #16 operationally coupled to #46) to receive the stream of mixed waste to be segregated (Col. 4 lines 6-9), 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 1, further including a plurality of feedback sensors, 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), further including a plurality of feedback sensors (Paragraph 0067 lines 8-21), the feedback sensors 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 a plurality of feedback sensors, 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 1, further including a plurality of feedback sensors operatively coupled to the transport means.
Parr et al. (US 2019/0217342) teaches an automated segregation unit (Paragraph 0002 lines 1-6), further including a plurality of feedback sensors (Paragraph 0067 lines 8-21) 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 a plurality of feedback sensors 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 1, 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. 10 lines 65-68, Col. 11 lines 30-60, Col. 12 lines 46-49).
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, a stream of mixed waste at a pre-defined frame rate and/or scanning rate in real-time by capturing a predefined number of frames per unit time (Col. 6 lines 1-8, 21-26), a stream of mixed waste comprising plastic (Col. 1 lines 6-11) by one or more optical decision maker (Fig. 1 #44, Col. 4 lines 10-33, 42-55), the optical decision maker (Fig. 1 #44) being integrated with a first vision system (Fig. 1 #22, 24), the first vision system (Fig. 1 #22, 24) comprising a database comprising one or more standard profiles including pre-configured values of one or more pre-defined identity parameters (Col. 10 lines 65-68, Col. 11 lines 30-60, Col. 12 lines 46-49);
b. categorizing the identified materials in the scanned stream of mixed waste into one or more categories in real-time by the optical decision maker (Col. 4 lines 34-57, Col. 11 lines 30-60) based upon one or more predefined identity parameters (Col. 10 lines 31-34), the identity parameter comprises at least one of a chemical characteristic and a physical characteristic (Col. 10 lines 31-36);
c. instructing one or more optical sorter (Fig. 1 #64) to eject the categorized recyclable materials (Col. 4 lines 62-68) from step b, the instruction being communicated by the optical decision maker (Fig. 1 #44, Col. 4 lines 62-68);
d. 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
c. collecting respective categories of ejected recyclable materials from step d (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, and a first vision system including one of an AI powered vision system, or a NIR/IR camera based vision system.
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 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) by one or more optical decision maker (Paragraph 0046 lines 1-14, Fig. 3 #302), the optical decision maker (Fig. 3 #302) being integrated with a first vision system (Fig. 3 #306) including one of an AI powered vision system, or a NIR/IR camera based vision system (Paragraph 0083 lines 3-6).
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). Additionally, Parr et al. (US 2019/0217342) explains that an optical sorter may be able to distinguish between fibers and film/plastics using characteristics such as reflectivity/absorption of certain wavelengths, such as infrared (Paragraph 0083 lines 3-6), and states that using a combination of one or more of size, density, shape characterizations, visual and infrared identification, and automated quality control stations, human staffed positions can be minimized and the plant can be dynamically configured to accommodate waste streams of a fluctuating nature and composition, thereby allowing the plant to be operated more efficiently over longer periods of time and techniques such as machine vision and object recognition, potentially fed by different sensor technologies such as IR, UV, visible light, magnetic, chemical, and similar such sensors, to increase separation accuracy to further maximize recovery of separated recyclable waste streams and increase value thereof (Paragraph 0025 lines 4-22).
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, and a first vision system including one of an AI powered vision system, or a NIR/IR camera based vision system as taught by Parr et al. (US 2019/0217342) in order to separate waste streams of a fluctuating nature and composition which may be recovered for secondary purposes, therefore minimizing the amount of waste sent to landfills and maximizing the recovery of recyclable waste streams.
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).
Regarding claim 22, Walsh et al. (US 5443164) lacks teaching the method as claimed in claim 17, wherein after categorizing the recyclable materials, the method further comprises
a. determining a ratio of the one or more categories of the recyclable materials in the mixed waste in real-time by the optical decision maker; and
b. prioritizing, in real-time, the categorized recyclable materials from step b by the optical decision maker based upon the ratio of the one or more categories of recyclable materials.
Parr et al. (US 2019/0217342) teaches a method of operating an automated segregation unit (Paragraph 0002 lines 1-6), wherein after categorizing the recyclable materials, the method further comprises
a. determining a ratio of the one or more categories of the recyclable materials in the mixed waste in real-time by the optical decision maker (Paragraph 0076 lines 1-21); and
b. prioritizing, in real-time, the categorized recyclable materials from step b by the optical decision maker based upon the ratio of the one or more categories of recyclable materials (Paragraph 0076 lines 1-38, Paragraph 0078 lines 1-6).
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 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 wherein after categorizing the recyclable materials, the method further comprises a. determining a ratio of the one or more categories of the recyclable materials in the mixed waste in real-time by the optical decision maker; and b. prioritizing, in real-time, the categorized recyclable materials from step b by the optical decision maker based upon the ratio of the one or more categories of recyclable materials as taught by Parr et al. (US 2019/0217342) in order to dynamically reconfigure the various material handling units in real time to target varying types of materials therefore maximizing and optimizing recovery from the waste streams and recovering the highest possible value stream.
Regarding claim 23, Walsh et al. (US 5443164) lacks teaching the automated segregation unit as claimed in claim 1, wherein, the one or more optical decision makers set a priority of ejection of the one or more categories of recyclable materials in real-time based upon the ratio of the one or more categories of recyclable materials in the mixed waste.
Parr et al. (US 2019/0217342) teaches a method of operating an automated segregation unit (Paragraph 0002 lines 1-6), wherein, the one or more optical decision makers (Fig. 3 #302) set a priority of ejection of the one or more categories of recyclable materials in real-time based upon the ratio of the one or more categories of recyclable materials in the mixed waste (Paragraph 0076 lines 1-38, Paragraph 0078 lines 1-6).
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 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 wherein, the one or more optical decision makers set a priority of ejection of the one or more categories of recyclable materials in real-time based upon the ratio of the one or more categories of recyclable materials in the mixed waste as taught by Parr et al. (US 2019/0217342) in order to dynamically reconfigure the various material handling units in real time to target varying types of materials therefore maximizing and optimizing recovery from the waste streams and recovering the highest possible value stream.
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) teaches the automated segregation unit as claimed in claim 1, wherein the automated segregation unit includes a plurality of storage units (Fig. 1 #70) operationally coupled to the transport means (Fig. 1 #70 operationally coupled to #46) to collect respective categories of segregated recyclable materials (Col. 4 line 62-Col. 5 line 5).
Walsh et al. (US 5443164) lacks teaching the automated segregation unit as claimed in claim 1, wherein the storage unit 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 unit (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 unit 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 e.
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 e (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 e 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 May 13th, 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of amended claim(s) 1 and 17 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). Parr teaches the optical decision maker being integrated with a first vision system including one of an AI powered vision system or a NIR/IR camera-based vision system (see claim 1).
Applicant's arguments, regarding Walsh teaching “the identity parameter comprises at least one of a chemical characteristic and a physical characteristic” have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The Examiner would like to clarify that Walsh states that the items may be classified into categories based on transparency and color (Col. 10 lines 31-36), therefore the material profiles of the items are based on physical characteristics of the items.
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 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
Prosecution Insights