DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Election /Restrictions REQUIREMENT FOR UNITY OF INVENTION Restriction is required under 35 U.S.C. 121 and 372. This application contains the following inventions or groups of inventions which are not so linked as to form a single general inventive concept under PCT Rule 13.1. In accordance with 37 CFR 1.499, applicant is required, in reply to this action, to elect a single invention to which the claims must be restricted. I) Group I , Claims 1- 5 , drawn to a beverage brewing device II) Group II , Claims 6 , drawn to a vending machine Applicant is required, in reply to this action, to elect between invention groups I or II above. The reply must also identify the claims readable on the elected species, including any claims subsequently added. An argument that a claim is allowable or that all claims are generic is considered non-responsive unless accompanied by an election The groups of inventions listed above do not relate to a single general inventive concept under PCT Rule 13.1 because under PCT Rule 13.2 they lack the same or corresponding special technical features for the following reasons: Favre (US 8875617 B2) in view of CECCARELLI (WO 2016120668 A1) establishes that independent claim 1 in its’ current form lacks novelty. The existence of an anticipatory references demonstrating that one or more independent claims lack novelty establishes that the inventions do not relate to a single general inventive concept. Regarding claim 1, Favre ( US 8875617 B2 ) teaches a beverage brewing device ( Figure 1a) comprising: a beverage brewing device for receiving a single-use beverage cartridge (Column 3 Lines 60-63, introduction channel 14 for inserting a capsule into the apparatus) , wherein the cartridge contains beverage material for brewing (Column 1 Lines 44-46, capsule containing a substance to be extracted by introducing hot water; Column 2 Line 59 – Column 3 Line 8, pressurized water is injected into the capsule which constitutes brewing; Column 3 Line 64 – Column 4 Line 4, capsule-holder 8 comprises a housing 18 with an extraction wall 22 forming the bottom of the housing such as to extract the liquid product after perforation) ; wherein the beverage brewing device discards the cartridge in response to the brewing (Column 4 Line 57 – Column 5 Line 2, mechanism ejects the capsule 24 and discharges it through the discharge orifice 16; Column 3 Lines 33-35, capsule 24 is ejected after use) ; a compost box for receiving the cartridge (Column 7 Lines 4-10, capsule is ejected into a discharge pan 59) Favre fails to explicitly teach: a mill machine disintegrates the cartridge after receiving the cartridge from the beverage brewing device; and a compost box for receiving the disintegrated cartridge from the mill machine. CECCARELLI (WO 2016120668 A1) teaches an apparatus for treating used capsules or capsules, comprising: a mill machine disintegrates the cartridge (Page 5 Lines 23-27, container B which constitutes a treatment compartment provided with a bladed impeller set in rotation by means of a shaft 5; Page 6 Lines 8-20, the blades of the impeller cut and tear the pack of each capsule) after receiving the cartridge from the beverage brewing device (Page 6, Lines 5-7, chute H for getting the capsules to enter the treatment compartment provided in the bottom container B) ; and a compost box for receiving the disintegrated cartridge from the mill machine (Page 5 Lines 20-22, bottom bag container S1 designed to collect the organic remains; Page 5 Line 31 – Page 6 Line 1, top bag container S2 for collecting and storing the packs of the treated capsules) . It would have thus been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Favre with CECCARELLI and have the mill machine disintegrate the cartridges after receiving the cartridges from the beverage brewing device. This would have been done to carry out separation of materials of which the coffee capsules are made up immediately after their use so that it will be possible to collect the recyclable materials separately from the organic ones ( CECCARELLI Page 3 Lines 8-17). The existence of references demonstrating that one or more generic claims lack novelty establishes that the inventions do not relate to a single general inventive concept. As set forth in MPEP 1850: The expression “special technical feature” is defined in PCT Rule 13.2 as meaning those technical features that define a contribution which each of the inventions, considered as a whole, makes over the prior art…Whether or not any particular technical feature makes a "contribution” over the prior art, and therefore constitutes a “special technical feature”, should be considered with respect to novelty and inventive step. For example, a document discovered in the international search shows that there is a presumption of lack of novelty or inventive step in a main claim, so that there may be no technical relationship left over the prior art among the claimed inventions involving one or more of the same or corresponding special technical features, leaving two or more dependent claims without a single general inventive concept. Upon the allowance of a generic claim, applicant will be entitled to consideration of claims to additional species which are written in dependent form or otherwise require all the limitations of an allowed generic claim. Currently none of the claims are generic to the restrictions. Applicant is required, in reply to this action, to elect a single inventive idea between inventions above. An argument that a claim is allowable or that all claims are generic is considered non-responsive unless accompanied by an election. During a telephone conversation with Arthur Tan-Chi Yuan on 3/20/2026 a provisional election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention of Group 1, claims 1-5. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to this Office action. Claim 6 is withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention. Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “conduit connecting between the mill machine and compost box” of claim 2, the “valve controlling openings and closing of the conduit” of claim 3, and the “blender” of claim 4 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. 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 appl icant regards as his invention. Claims 1-5 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 limitation “ A beverage brewing device comprising: a beverage brewing device for receiving a single-use beverage cartridge ” (emphasis added) is unclear. It is unclear whether the “beverage brewing device” recited in the preamble is intended to be introducing the same beverage brewing device as the limitation which states “a beverage brewing device f or receiving a single-use beverage cartridge ”. If the two limitations are intended to refer to the same “beverage brewing device”, it is unclear how the beverage brewing device comprises itself, while also comprises of a mill machine and a compost box, which are simultaneous part of and not part of “a beverage brewing device”. For purposes of examination, the limitation “a beverage brewing device f or receiving a single-use beverage cartridge ” will be interpreted as a subpart of the whole “beverage brewing device” introduced in the preamble. Claims 2-5 are rejected upon their dependency on claim 1. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claim (s) 1- 2 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Favre ( US 8875617 B2 ) in view of CECCARELLI ( WO 2016120668 A1 ). Regarding claim 1, Favre ( US 8875617 B2 ) teaches a beverage brewing device ( Figure 1a) comprising: a beverage brewing device for receiving a single-use beverage cartridge ( Column 3 Lines 60-63, introduction channel 14 for inserting a capsule into the apparatus ) , wherein the cartridge contains beverage material for brewing ( Column 1 Lines 44-46, capsule containing a substance to be extracted by introducing hot water; Column 2 Line 59 – Column 3 Line 8, pressurized water is injected into the capsule which constitutes brewing ; Column 3 Line 64 – Column 4 Line 4, capsule-holder 8 comprises a housing 18 with an extraction wall 22 forming the bottom of the housing such as to extract the liquid product after perforation) ; wherein the beverage brewing device discards the cartridge in response to the brewing (Column 4 Line 57 – Column 5 Line 2, mechanism ejects the capsule 24 and discharges it through the discharge orifice 16; Column 3 Lines 33-35, capsule 24 is ejected after use) ; a compost box for receiving the cartridge (Column 7 Lines 4-10, capsule is ejected into a discharge pan 59) Favre fails to explicitly teach: a mill machine disintegrates the cartridge after receiving the cartridge from the beverage brewing device; and a compost box for receiving the disintegrated cartridge from the mill machine. CECCARELLI (WO 2016120668 A1) teaches an apparatus for treating used capsules or capsules, comprising: a mill machine disintegrates the cartridge (Page 5 Lines 23-27, container B which constitutes a treatment compartment provided with a bladed impeller set in rotation by means of a shaft 5; Page 6 Lines 8-20, the blades of the impeller cut and tear the pack of each capsule) after receiving the cartridge from the beverage brewing device ( Page 6, Lines 5-7, c h ute H for getting the capsules to enter the treatment compartment provided in the bottom container B ) ; and a compost box for receiving the disintegrated cartridge from the mill machine (Page 5 Lines 20-22, bottom bag container S1 designed to collect the organic remains; Page 5 Line 31 – Page 6 Line 1, top bag container S2 for collecting and storing the packs of the treated capsules) . It would have thus been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Favre with CECCARELLI and have the mill machine disintegrate the cartridges after receiving the cartridges from the beverage brewing device. This would have been done to carry out separation of materials of which the coffee capsules are made up immediately after their use so that it will be possible to collect the recyclable materials separately from the organic ones ( CECCARELLI Page 3 Lines 8-17). Regarding claim 2, Favre as modified teaches the beverage brewing device of claim 1 . CECCARELLI further teaches: a conduit connecting between the mill machine and the compost box (Figure 3 Page 8 Lines 20-31, at least one mesh or sieve R1 set at the outlet from which the bits of the pack of the cartridges or capsules already treated exit into the bag) It would have been obvious for the same motivation as claim 1. The Office further notes that ha ving a conduit connecting the mill machine and the compost box is well known in the art of capsule destruction as evidenced by Figure 2 of Franssen ( US 20100212520 A1 ) and Figure 2 of CUASANTE (FR 3050916 A3). Regarding claim 4, Favre as modified teaches the beverage brewing device of claim 1. CECCARELLI further teaches: the mill machine comprises a blender (Page 6 Lines 8-20, the blades of the impeller cut and tear the pack of each capsule) . It would have been obvious for the same motivation as claim 1. Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Favre ( US 8875617 B2 ) in view of CECCARELLI ( WO 2016120668 A1 ) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of MORAND (US 20210354912 A1) and KARAAGAC (WO 2017076821 A1) . Regarding claim 3, Favre as modified teaches the beverage brewing device of claim 2 , further comprising a valve controlling openings and closings (Figures 2a-2f Column 6 Lines 1-10, after water injection the injection head is moved up such as to open the discharge orifice 16 and eject the capsule from the housing 18; injection head 10 moving upwards and downwards acts as a valve opening and closing access to the discharge orifice 16) . Favre as modified fails to teach: a valve controlling openings and closings of the conduit MORAND (US 20210354912 A1) teaches a waste disposal device, wherein: openings and closings of the conduit (Paragraph 59, actuation mechanism is actuated to open and close the lid assembly such as to close off the bag) It would have thus been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Favre with MORAND and have the disposal device consist of a means of open and closing of the conduit. This would have been done such as that odors may be blocked from escaping the bag ( MORAND Paragraphs 59 and 81). While Favre modified with MORAND fails to explicitly teach that a valve is used to control the opening and closing of the lid, KARAAGAC (WO 2017076821 A1) teaches a capsule coffee machine wherein valves are known in the art of coffee machines to be used to selectively open and close openings to a residue container (KARAAGAC Paragraph 24). It would have thus been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Favre with KARAAGAC and used a valve for the control of the cover. This would have been done to selectively open the path to the residue container ( KARAAGAC Paragraph 24 ). Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Favre ( US 8875617 B2 ) in view of CECCARELLI ( WO 2016120668 A1 ) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of BUGNANO ( US 20160009486 A1 ). Regarding claim 5, Favre as modified teaches the beverage brewing device of claim 1 . Favre as modified fails to explicitly teach: the single-use beverage cartridge comprises a fiber-based single-use coffee cartridge. BUGNANO ( US 20160009486 A1 ) teaches a cartridge for the preparation of coffee (Paragraph 1), wherein: the single-use beverage cartridge comprises a fiber-based single-use coffee cartridge (Paragraph 90, cartridge is manufacturing using a biodegradable/compostable material including natural fibers) . It would have thus been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Favre with BUGNANO and have the single-use beverage cartridge be fiber-based. This would have been done to facilitate creating a biodegradable/compostable cartridge ( BUGNANO Paragraph 90). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT FRANKLIN JEFFERSON WANG whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-7782 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F 10AM-6PM (E.S.T) . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Ibrahime Abraham can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571) 270-5569 . 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. /F.J.W./ Examiner, Art Unit 3761 /IBRAHIME A ABRAHAM/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761