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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference signs mentioned in the description: chassis 183, blade rotation axis B, and arrow 1603.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “152” has been used to designate both a gear arrangement and a drive source, and reference character “700” has been used to designate both a process validation module and a power supply.
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. 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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: on page 10 line 21, “motors 140 and 151” should read “motors 140 and 150”; on page 14 lines 17-18, “gear arrangement 154” should read “gear arrangement 152”; and on page 16 lines 8-9, “closure arrangement 172” should read “closure arrangement 170”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 2-13 are objected to because of the following informalities: in the preamble of each claim, “A method according to claim [X]” should be amended to “The method according to claim [X]”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 7-10 and 16-18 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 7, the claim recites “wherein the waste processing apparatus comprises”; however, it is noted that in Claim 1 the waste processing apparatus is only recited as the intended use of the control system. As such, the waste processing apparatus is not part of the claimed invention and therefore cannot be further limited with a “wherein” statement. The claim is therefore rendered indefinite.
Further regarding Claim 7, the limitation “the rotation speed and/or rotation direction” does not have antecedent basis in the claim.
Regarding Claim 9, the limitation “the torque” does not have antecedent basis in the claim.
Claims 8 and 10 are rejected by virtue of their dependence upon Claim 7.
Regarding Claim 16, the limitation ““the rotation speed and/or rotation direction” does not have antecedent basis in the claim.
Regarding Claim 17, the limitation “the torque” does not have antecedent basis in the claim.
Claim 18 is rejected by virtue of its dependence upon Claim 17.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-11 and 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Carmel (US 2013/0306763, provided by Applicant).
Regarding Claim 1, Carmel discloses (Figures 1a-c and 12a) a control system for a waste processing apparatus, the control system comprising a controller (control box 16; [0094] lns 3-4) configured to: control an actuator (motor 11b) of the waste processing apparatus to move a shredding device (shredder 2) of the waste processing apparatus into at least a shred position (shown in Figure 1c) in which a vessel (chamber 4) of the shredding device is able to hold liquid ([0085] lns 1-3, [0096] lns 3-6, [0098] lns 2-3: when chamber 4 is fully vertical as shown in Figure 1c, the chamber 4 of shredder 2 is able to hold liquid); control a fluid delivery device (steam generator 10) of the waste processing apparatus to deliver a treatment fluid into the vessel of the shredding device ([0082] lns 12-15: steam is considered to be a treatment fluid as it sterilizes, i.e. treats, the shredded waste); and control the shredding device to perform a shredding function to shred waste within the vessel of the shredding device ([0082] lns 10-12).
Regarding Claim 2, Carmel discloses (Figures 1c and 12a) the controller (control box 16) is configured to receive sensor data from a sensor ([0014] lns 1-5: the magnetic switch is interpreted as a sensor) associated with the vessel (chamber 4), and determine, based on the sensor data, that the vessel is in the shred position (Figure 12a shows an input labeled “Chamb. Angle”, i.e. control box 16 receives data regarding the angle of chamber 4, which determines if it is in the shred position).
Regarding Claim 3, Carmel discloses (Figures 1c and 12a) the controller (control box 16) is configured to, in response to determining that the vessel (chamber 4) is in the shred position (position shown in Figure 1c), control a closure mechanism of the waste processing apparatus to move a closure arrangement (door 6) to close the vessel of the shredding device ([0156] lns 3-5, [0094] lns 3-4, [0143] lns 3-6: control box 16 controls the entire process, including the automatic closing of door 6 in the shred position).
Regarding Claim 4, Carmel discloses (Figures 1c and 12a) the controller (control box 16) is configured to, in response to determining that the vessel (chamber 4) is in the shred position (position shown in Figure 1c), control one or more locking mechanisms of the waste processing apparatus to lock the shredding device (shredder 2) in the shred position ([0139] lns 6-9, [0094] lns 3-4, [0143] lns 3-6: control box 16 controls the entire process, including the automatic locking of door 6 of shredder 2 when chamber 4 is in the shred position).
Regarding Claim 5, Carmel discloses (Figures 1c and 12a) the controller (control box 16) is configured to control the actuator (motor 11b) to move the shredding device (shredder 2) into the shred position ([0085] lns 1-3, [0096] lns 3-6, [0098] lns 2-3: the position shown in Figure 2c is the shred position) in response to receiving an input signal from a user input device of the waste processing apparatus ([0152]-[0153], [0156] lns 3-5: control box 16 moves chamber 4 of shredder 2 to the shred position in response to a user input on a panel of the device).
Regarding Claim 6, Carmel discloses (Figures 1c and 12a) the controller (control box 16) is configured to control the fluid delivery device (steam generator 10) to deliver a predefined amount of treatment fluid into the vessel (chamber 4) of the shredding device ([0101] lns 1-3: the amount of steam corresponding to the given temperature and pressure conditions is interpreted as a predefined amount of treatment fluid).
Regarding Claim 7, Carmel discloses (Figures 1a-c, 3a, and 12a) the waste processing apparatus comprises a blade arrangement motor (motor 11a) configured to drive a blade arrangement (blade assembly 18) of the shredding device (shredder 2) to perform the shredding function ([0082] lns 10-11), and the controller (control box 16) is configured to control the blade arrangement motor to control the rotation speed and/or rotation direction of the blade arrangement ([0109] lns 3-7, [0094] lns 3-4, [0143] lns 3-6: control box 16 controls the entire process, including the rotation speed/direction of the blade assembly 18).
Regarding Claim 8, Carmel discloses (Figures 1a-c, 3a, and 12a) the controller (control box 16) is configured to control the blade arrangement motor (motor 11a) to alternate between different rotation directions ([0016] lns 2-13, [0109] lns 3-7).
Regarding Claim 9, Carmel discloses (Figures 1a-c, 3a, and 12a) the controller (control box 16) is configured to control the blade arrangement motor (motor 11a) to control the rotation speed of the blade arrangement (blade assembly 18) based on the torque of the blade arrangement motor ([0109], [0114], [0116], [0159] lns 7-15: motor 11a is controlled to rotate the blade assembly 18 of shredder 2 at different speeds, which correspond to different torques, based on the needs at different stages of the process; e.g. the fast shredding requires a higher rotational speed which generally corresponds to a lower torque, and slow shredding requires a lower rotational speed which generally corresponds to a higher torque).
Regarding Claim 10, Carmel discloses (Figures 1a-c, 3a, and 12a) the controller (control box 16) of the control system is configured to: control the blade arrangement motor (motor 11a) to drive the blade arrangement (blade assembly 18) in a first mode in which the blade arrangement rotates at a first speed ([0099] lns 1-2), and control the blade arrangement motor to drive the blade arrangement in a second mode in which the blade arrangement motor rotates at a second speed greater than the first speed ([0099] lns 2-3: “high speed” is interpreted as being a higher speed than the initial shredding speed). Carmel does not explicitly disclose that the controller switches to the second mode in response to a torque of the blade arrangement motor dropping below a first threshold value. However, one skilled in the art would understand that the load on the motor, which corresponds to the torque, decreases as the shredding function progresses and the waste particles get smaller; therefore, the torque of the blade arrangement motor will naturally drop to some degree while operating in the first mode, and will have dropped below a first threshold value when the controller switches to the second mode. Accordingly, this limitation of the claim is met.
Regarding Claim 11, Carmel discloses (Figure 12a) the controller (control box 16) is configured to control the shredding device (shredder 2) to terminate the shredding function after a predefined shredding time has elapsed ([0099] lns 1-4).
Regarding Claim 13, Carmel discloses (Figures 1b and 12) the controller (control box 16) is configured to: control the actuator (motor 11b) to move the shredding device (shredder 2) into an emptying position ([0085] lns 1-3, [0096] lns 3-6; emptying position shown in Figure 1b) in which waste can be emptied out of the vessel (chamber 4) of the shredding device ([0106] lns 1-3), and control a conveying means to move said waste into a waste bin ([0094 lns 3-4: control box 16 controls the entire process; [0106] lns 1-3: chamber 4 being rotated to its unloading position is interpreted as a conveying means).
Regarding Claim 14, Carmel discloses (Figures 1a-c and 12a) a waste processing apparatus comprising: a shredding device (shredder 2) comprising a vessel (chamber 4) for holding waste and treatment fluid during processing ([0082] lns 2-4, 12-15: steam is considered to be a treatment fluid as it sterilizes, i.e. treats, the shredded waste), wherein the shredding device is configured to perform a shredding function to shred waste within the vessel ([0015] lns 1-7); an actuator (motor 11b) configured to move the shredding device into a shred position (shown in Figure 1c) in which the vessel is able to hold liquid ([0085] lns 1-3, [0096] lns 3-6, [0098] lns 2-3: when chamber 4 is fully vertical as shown in Figure 1c, the chamber 4 of shredder 2 is able to hold liquid); a fluid delivery device (steam generator 10) configured to deliver a treatment fluid into the vessel of the shredding device ([0082] lns 12-15); and a control system configured to: control the actuator of the waste processing apparatus to move the shredding device of the waste processing apparatus into at least a shred position (shown in Figure 1c) in which the vessel of the shredding device is able to hold liquid ([0085] lns 1-3, [0096] lns 3-6, [0098] lns 2-3: when chamber 4 is fully vertical as shown in Figure 1c, the chamber 4 of shredder 2 is able to hold liquid); control the fluid delivery device of the waste processing apparatus to deliver the treatment fluid into the vessel of the shredding device ([0082] lns 12-15); and control the shredding device to perform the shredding function to shred waste within the vessel of the shredding device ([0082] lns 10-12), wherein a controller (control box 16) of the control system is communicatively coupled to the shredding device, the actuator and the fluid delivery device ([0094] lns 3-4, [0143] lns 3-6: control box 16 control the entire process and thus is communicatively coupled to all the components of the waste processing apparatus).
Regarding Claim 15, Carmel discloses (Figure 1c) the actuator comprises a motor (motor 11b) configured to rotate the shredding device (shredder 2) into at least the shred position ([0085] lns 1-3, [0096] lns 3-6, [0098] lns 2-3).
Regarding Claim 16, Carmel discloses (Figures 1a-c, 3a, and 12a) a blade arrangement motor (motor 11a) configured to drive a blade arrangement (blade assembly 18) of the shredding device (shredder 2) to perform the shredding function ([0082] lns 10-11), wherein the controller (control box 16) of the control system is configured to control the blade arrangement motor to control the rotation speed and/or rotation direction of the blade arrangement ([0109] lns 3-7, [0094] lns 3-4, [0143] lns 3-6: control box 16 controls the entire process, including the rotation speed/direction of the blade assembly 18).
Regarding Claim 17, Carmel discloses (Figures 1a-c, 3a, and 12a) the controller (control box 16) of the control system is configured to control the blade arrangement motor (motor 11a) to control the rotation speed of the blade arrangement (blade assembly 18) based on the torque of the blade arrangement motor ([0109], [0114], [0116], [0159] lns 7-15: motor 11a is controlled to rotate the blade assembly 18 of shredder 2 at different speeds, which correspond to different torques, based on the needs at different stages of the process; e.g. the fast shredding requires a higher rotational speed which generally corresponds to a lower torque, and slow shredding requires a lower rotational speed which generally corresponds to a higher torque).
Regarding Claim 18, Carmel discloses (Figures 1a-c, 3a, and 12a) the controller (control box 16) of the control system is configured to: control the blade arrangement motor (motor 11a) to drive the blade arrangement (blade assembly 18) in a first mode in which the blade arrangement rotates at a first speed ([0099] lns 1-2), and control the blade arrangement motor to drive the blade arrangement in a second mode in which the blade arrangement motor rotates at a second speed greater than the first speed ([0099] lns 2-3: “high speed” is interpreted as being a higher speed than the initial shredding speed). Carmel does not explicitly disclose that the controller switches to the second mode in response to a torque of the blade arrangement motor dropping below a first threshold value. However, one skilled in the art would understand that the load on the motor, which corresponds to the torque, decreases as the shredding function progresses and the waste particles get smaller; therefore, the torque of the blade arrangement motor will naturally drop to some degree while operating in the first mode, and will have dropped below a first threshold value when the controller switches to the second mode. Accordingly, this limitation of the claim is met.
Regarding Claim 19, Carmel discloses (Figures 1a-c and 12a) a method of controlling a waste processing apparatus, the method comprising: controlling an actuator (motor 11b) of the waste processing apparatus to move a shredding device (shredder 2 with chamber 4) of the waste processing apparatus into a position (shown in Figure 1c) in which the shredding device is able to hold liquid ([0085] lns 1-3, [0096] lns 3-6, [0098] lns 2-3: when chamber 4 is fully vertical as shown in Figure 1c, the chamber 4 of shredder 2 is able to hold liquid); controlling a fluid delivery device (steam generator 10) of the waste processing apparatus to deliver a treatment fluid into the shredding device ([0082] lns 12-15: steam is considered to be a treatment fluid as it sterilizes, i.e. treats, the shredded waste); and controlling the shredding device to perform a shredding function to shred waste within the shredding device ([0082] lns 10-12).
Regarding Claim 20, Carmel discloses (Figures 1a-c and 12a) a computer-readable medium ([0220] lns 1-7) comprising instructions which, when executed by a processor ([0176] lns 4-5), cause the processor to: control an actuator (motor 11b) of a waste processing apparatus to move a shredding device (shredder 2 with chamber 4) of the waste processing apparatus into a position (shown in Figure 1c) in which the shredding device is able to hold liquid ([0085] lns 1-3, [0096] lns 3-6, [0098] lns 2-3: when chamber 4 is fully vertical as shown in Figure 1c, the chamber 4 of shredder 2 is able to hold liquid); control a fluid delivery device (steam generator 10) of the waste processing apparatus to deliver a treatment fluid into the shredding device ([0082] lns 12-15: steam is considered to be a treatment fluid as it sterilizes, i.e. treats, the shredded waste); and control the shredding device to perform a shredding function to shred waste within the shredding device ([0082] lns 10-12).
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 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carmel as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Chavez (US 2019/0210036).
Regarding Claim 12, Carmel does not disclose the controller being configured to control the shredding device to terminate the shredding function in response to determining that a torque value of the shredding device is below a second threshold torque value. In a related field of endeavor, Chavez teaches (Figures 8-9) a control system for a waste processing apparatus ([0001] lns 3-5) comprising a controller (control circuitry 804) configured to control a shredding device (shredding mechanism 801) to perform a shredding function to shred waste within a vessel (disposer chamber 801a) of the shredding device, the controller is configured to control the shredding device to terminate the shredding function in response to determining that a torque value of the shredding device is below a second threshold torque value ([0075] lns 8-15). A low motor torque is indicative of a low motor load, which occurs when the shredding function is complete or the vessel is empty ([0075] lns 4-7), in which case the shredding device no longer needs to run and can be shut off to save power. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the control system disclosed by Carmel such that the controller is configured to control the shredding device to terminate the shredding function in response to determining that a torque value of the shredding device is below a second threshold torque value, as taught by Chavez, in order to conserve power when the shredding function is complete or the vessel of the shredding device is empty.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TERESA A GUTHRIE whose telephone number is (571)270-5042. The examiner can normally be reached M/Tu/Th, 10-6 ET.
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, Christopher Templeton can be reached at (571) 270-1477. 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.
/TERESA A GUTHRIE/Examiner, Art Unit 3725
/Christopher L Templeton/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3725
Prosecution Insights