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 .
Notice of Amendment
In response to the amendment filed July 16, 2026, amended claims 1, 4, 7-8, 22-23 and 41; canceled claims 2-3, 6, 13, 15-17, 19, 21, 24-30, 33-36, 38-40, 42 and 44-59; and new claims 60-61 are acknowledged. The following new grounds of rejection are set forth:
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.
GROUND 2: Claim(s) 1, 4, 7-12, 20, 22-23, 41, 43 and 60-61 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent No. 4,627,339 to Bushman.
In regard to claims 1 and 41, Bushman discloses an automated avocado processing system, and method, which comprises:
a holding assembly 28/30/32/34 to hold an avocado, wherein the holding assembly comprises a first side and a second side laterally moveable relative to the first side (See Figs. 1, 6 and Col. 6, Lines 17-54);
a loading assembly 16/52/60 to load one avocado into the holding assembly from a plurality of avocados (see Figs. 1-2 and Col. 5, Lines 12-41);
a cutting assembly 18/20/74 to cut the avocado into a first part and a second part parts while the avocado is held in the holding assembly such that the first part is secured in the first side of the holding assembly and the second part is secured in the second side of the holding assembly (See Fig. 2, 7-8 and Col. 5, Lines 43-67);
a motor or actuator 32/34 arranged with the holding assembly to laterally separate the first side of the holding assembly from the second side of the holding assembly while the first side of the holding assembly carries the first part of the avocado and the second side of the holding assembly carries the second part of the avocado, thereby pulling the first part of the avocado from the second part of avocado (see Fig. 14 and Col. 6, Lines 17-54 and Col. 8, Line 65 - Col. 9, Line 3);
and a food collection assembly 40/42/44 to sort and collect edible parts from nonedible parts of the avocado (see Fig. 1 and Col. 4, Lines 47-64).
In regard to claim 4, Bushman discloses an automated avocado processing system, wherein the cutting assembly further comprises at least one opposing blade 18, 20 for cutting the avocado into the first part and the second part (See Figs. 7-9 and Col. 5, Lines 42-68).
In regard to claim 7, Bushman discloses an automated avocado processing system, further comprising at least one elongate member 18, 20 arranged to penetrate at least one of the first part of the avocado and the second part of the avocado while secured in the first side or second side of the holding assembly respectively (See Figs. 10-12 and Col. 5, Lines 42-68).
In regard to claims 8 and 43, Bushman discloses an automated avocado processing system, wherein the first side is a first half, and the second side is a second half, and wherein each of said first half and second half comprises a first tool 102 operable to extract the flesh from the skin (see Fig. 13).
In regard to claim 9, Bushman discloses an automated avocado processing system, wherein the first tool comprises a pair of rotating members 84/90/104/106 (See Fig. 10 and Col. 6, Line 55 - Col. 7, Line 2).
In regard to claim 10, Bushman discloses an automated avocado processing system, wherein the rotating members are separated by a gap having an adjustable size, and spring loaded to prevent the gap from freely spreading (See Fig. 10 and Col. 6, Line 55 - Col. 7, Line 2). Pneumatic devices are well known in the art to include springs and/or hydraulics for producing a desired pressure of engagement.
In regard to claim 11, Bushman discloses an automated avocado processing system, wherein each rotating member comprises a gripping feature 70 (see Col. 6, Lines 1-9).
In regard to claim 12, Bushman discloses an automated avocado processing system, wherein each pair of rotating members are controllable to turn such that when a skin-side of an avocado half is in contact with the pair of rotating members, the skin is drawn into the gap, and the flesh is extracted from the skin (See Col. 6, Line 55 - Col. 7, Line 2).
In regard to claim 20, Bushman discloses an automated avocado processing system, wherein the loading assembly further comprises an orientation assembly 16a-b for centering a main axis of the avocado along a target axis and presenting the avocado to the cutting assembly (See Figs. 5-8 and Col. 5, Lines 12-41).
In regard to claim 22, Bushman discloses an automated avocado processing system, wherein the orientation assembly comprises radially adjustable opposing funnel-shaped members (See Figs. 5-8 and Col. 5, Lines 12-41).
In regard to claim 23, Bushman discloses an automated avocado processing system, wherein the orientation assembly comprises a release mechanism arranged below the orientation assembly (See Figs. 5-8 and Col. 5, Lines 12-41).
In regard to claims 60-61, Bushman discloses an automated avocado processing system, wherein the at least one opposing blade comprises a first blade 18 that is arrangeable with the first side of the holding assembly to secure the first part of the avocado in the first side, and a second blade 20 that is arrangeable with the second side of the holding assembly to secure the second part of the avocado in the second side when the first side of the holding assembly is separated from the second side of the holding assembly, thereby pulling the first part of the avocado from the second part of the avocado (See Figs. 6-14).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
GROUND 2: Claim(s) 14, 18, 32 and 37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 4,627,339 to Bushman in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0315252 to Crescenzo.
In regard to claims 14 and 18, Bushman discloses an automated avocado processing system (See rejections above) but is silent with respect to wherein the loading assembly comprises a hopper adapted to receive a plurality of avocados. Crescenzo teaches of an analogous avocado processing system comprising a known-type shuffle feeder 1 to hold a plurality of avocados waiting processing and meter the avocados from to a loading assembly (see Figs. 1, 3 and para 0031-0033). It would have been obvious to a POSITA to modify the system of Bushman to include a hopper for holding a plurality of avocados and metering the avocadoes to the loading system, making the system more efficient as taught by Crescenzo and is extremely well known in the art.
In regard to claims 32 and 37, Bushman discloses an automated avocado processing system (See rejections above) but is silent with respect to a tracker and/or a computing device, power supply, and a plurality of sensors programmed and operable to control the loading, cutting and food collection assemblies. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to automate the apparatus of Bushman, since it has been held that broadly providing a mechanical or automatic means to replace manual activity which has accomplished the same result involves only routine skill in the art. In re Venner, 120 USPQ 192. Further evidence in the art of having a system controlled by computing means is provided by Crescenzo which teaches of an automated avocado processing system controlled by means of a programmable logic computer (see para 0043).
GROUND 3: Claim(s) 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 4,627,339 to Bushman in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0266196 to Mann et al.
In regard to claim 32, Bushman discloses a method for processing an avocado (see rejections above) but is silent with respect to wherein the food collection assembly is configured as a retractable drawer. Mann et al. teach of an analogous food processing machine having retractable drawer 6, 8 to store food (See Fig. 1). It would have been obvious to a POSITA to modify the hopper of Bushman to be retractable to provide a more user-friendly storage component, as well as protection to the processed fruit, as taught by Mann et al.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 4, 7-12, 14, 18, 20, 22-23, 31-32, 37, 41, 43 and 60-61 have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
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 MATTHEW J KASZTEJNA whose telephone number is (571)272-6086. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 7AM--3PM.
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, Eileen Lillis can be reached at 571-272-6928. 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.
/MATTHEW J KASZTEJNA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3993
Prosecution Insights