Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/488,033

HIGH SPEED MANIPULATION OF NON-UNIFORM OBJECTS

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Oct 17, 2023
Examiner
SINGH, KAVEL
Art Unit
3651
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Emerging Acquisitions LLC
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
1086 granted / 1298 resolved
+31.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+13.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
1327
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
45.0%
+5.0% vs TC avg
§102
40.1%
+0.1% vs TC avg
§112
12.9%
-27.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1298 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 1/28/2026 has been entered. 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 31, 32, 36-38, 40-42, and 46-50 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. The claims teach a rigid member, but there is no reference to a rigid member in the specification therefore it is unclear of what the claim limitations is referring to in the drawings. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 31 and 41 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 31-34, 36-44 and 46-50 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Davis U.S. Patent No. 9,035,210. Claims 31 and 41, Davis teaches a system 100 for manipulating and sorting non-uniform objects, the system Fig.1 Abstract comprising: a conveyor 120 operable to transport non-uniform objects along a first trajectory in a conveying direction C3 L10-35; a detection system 140 operable to identify one or more target objects from the non-uniform objects being transported on the conveyor 120 C3 L35-55; and a rigid member 160 for contacting the identified one or more target objects on the conveyor 120, wherein, without grasping the identified one or more target objects via 140, the rigid member 160 directly contacts via 200 and displaces the identified one or more target objects from the first trajectory onto a second trajectory to separate the identified one or more target objects from the non-uniform objects for subsequent sorting C4 L3-60 Fig. 4. Claims 32 and 42, Davis teaches one or more robotic arms 200 coupled to the rigid member 160, wherein the one or more robotic arms 200 drive the rigid member 160 relative to the conveyor 120 to contact the identified one or more target objects C4 L3-60 Fig.. Claims 33 and 43, Davis teaches the one or more robotic arms 200 are in communication with the detection system 140, and wherein the detection system 140 identifies a position of the one or more target objects on the conveyor 120 and drives the one or more robotic arms 200 based on the identified position of the identified one or more target objects C4 L3-60 Fig. 4. Claims 34 and 44, Davis teaches the detection system 140 includes a vision system 140 having a field-of-view covering at least a portion of the conveyor 120, the vision system 140 operable to visualize the non-uniform objects on the conveyor 120 and identify the one or more target objects therefrom C4 L3-60 Fig. 4. Claims 36 and 46, Davis teaches the rigid member 160 is movable relative to the conveyor to physically strike the one or more target objects and displace each identified target objects onto the second trajectory in a three-dimensional space relative to the conveyor 120 C4 L3-60 Fig. 4. Claim 37 and 47, Davis teaches the rigid member 160 is configured to directly contact the identified one or more target objects and displace each identified target object by lifting the identified target object off the conveyor 120 C4 L3-60 Fig. 4. Claims 38 and 48, Davis teaches the rigid member 160 directly contacts the identified one or more target objects via 140 and accelerates each identified target object via within a three-dimensional space from the first trajectory onto the second trajectory C4 L3-60 Fig. 4. Claims 39 and 49, Davis teaches the mechanism 160 is stationary relative to the conveyor 120 Fig. 1 (when awaiting signal to process). Claims 40 and 50, Davis teaches a second rigid member 122 spaced apart from the rigid member 160 Fig. 1, wherein the second rigid member 122 displaces the one or more target objects 1 from the second trajectory onto a third trajectory to further separate the identified one or more target objects from the non-uniform objects 1 C4 L60-67; C5 L1-13. 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. Claim(s) 35 and 45 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davis U.S. Patent No. 9,035,210in view of Carver U.S. Patent No. 5,023,800. Claims 35 and 45, Davis teaches a computer system 330 in communication with the vision system 140 and operable to identify the one or more target objects C5 L15-40, but does not teach as Carver teaches an artificial intelligence system C32 L10-25. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to combine the computer system disclosed in Davis with the artificial intelligence system taught in Carver with a reasonable expectation of success because Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAVEL SINGH whose telephone number is (571)272-2362. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8am-6pm. 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, Gene Crawford can be reached on (571) 272-6911. 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. /KAVEL SINGH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3651 KS
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 17, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 31, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Jul 02, 2025
Response Filed
Jul 24, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Jan 28, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 22, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 11, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12589944
TRAY FOR PHYSICAL DISTRIBUTION SORTER AND ARTICLE SORTING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583683
Method of Making Positive Drive Conveyor Belt
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583686
ROLLER-AND-RAIL CARGO HANDLING SYSTEM WITH PALLET-MOVING TROLLEY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577057
VERTICALLY ADJUSTABLE SORTATION DEVICES AND SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12577052
CERAMIC ABLATION-RESISTANT CONVEYOR BELT AND PREPARATION METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
84%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+13.7%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1298 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month