Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/667,133

BIN OUTPUT EXPANDER DEVICES, SYSTEMS, AND METHODS

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
May 17, 2024
Examiner
DEVINE, MOLLY K
Art Unit
3653
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
DMT SOLUTIONS GLOBAL CORPORATION
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
67%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 67% — above average
67%
Career Allow Rate
145 granted / 216 resolved
+15.1% vs TC avg
Strong +33% interview lift
Without
With
+33.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
42 currently pending
Career history
258
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
§103
51.6%
+11.6% vs TC avg
§102
18.3%
-21.7% vs TC avg
§112
26.9%
-13.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 216 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 November 6th, 2025 has been entered. Response to Amendment The amendment filed November 6th, 2025 has been entered. Claims 1, 3-4, 6 and 8 have been amended. Claims 1 and 3-10 remain pending. Applicant’s amendments to the claims overcome the 112(a) and 112(b) rejections previously set forth in the Final Office Action mailed August 8th, 2025. 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, 3 and 5-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mohammed (US 11027923). Regarding claim 1, Mohammed (US 11027923) teaches a bin multiplexing system (Col. 1 lines 5-21) comprising: a conveyor belt (Fig. 1 #105) configured for receiving a plurality of parcels (Fig. 1 #115) from a parcel sorter (Col. 4 lines 9-25); multiple diverter mechanisms (Fig. 1 #110, Col. 2 lines 15-16) operably coupled to the conveyor belt (Col. 2 lines 26-35), each diverter mechanism configured to move one or more parcels of the plurality of parcels from the conveyor belt (Col. 2 lines 26-35), wherein each diverter mechanism is configured to provide in-line sorting of the one or more parcels of the plurality of parcels received from the parcel sorter (Col. 2 lines 26-35); and a plurality of sorting containers (Fig. 1 #130) positioned beneath at least one of a portion of the conveyor belt or the multiple diverter mechanisms (Fig. 1 #130 positioned beneath #105 and #110), each sorting container configured to receive, from a respective corresponding one of the diverter mechanisms (Col. 2 lines 41-46), the one or more parcels of the plurality of parcels from the conveyor belt (Col. 2 lines 61-65). Regarding claim 3, Mohammed (US 11027923) teaches the bin multiplexing system of claim 1, wherein the plurality of sorting containers (Fig. 1 #130) comprises a plurality of intermediate bins (Fig. 1 #120) and wherein the system further comprises one or more output containers (Fig. 1 #130) configured to receive the parcels from the plurality of intermediate bins (Fig. 1 #130 receives #115 from #120). Regarding claim 5, Mohammed (US 11027923) teaches the bin multiplexing system of claim 3, further comprising a stop flap mechanism (Fig. 1 #125) positioned between the plurality of intermediate bins and the one or more output containers (Fig. 1 #125 positioned between #120 and #130). Regarding claim 6, Mohammed (US 11027923) teaches the bin multiplexing system of claim 5, wherein the stop flap mechanism (Fig. 1 #125) is operable to selectively discharge the parcels to the one or more output containers (Col. 2 lines 51-62). Regarding claim 7, Mohammed (US 11027923) teaches the bin multiplexing system of claim 6, further comprising one or more sensors (Col. 5 lines 24-32) configured to detect whether the one or more output containers (Fig. 1 #130) is in one or more of a full container condition (Col. 5 lines 23-32), a correct container condition (Col. 7 lines 8-18), or a no container condition (Col. 5 lines 47-56). Regarding claim 8, Mohammed (US 11027923) teaches the bin multiplexing system of claim 7, wherein the stop flap mechanism (Fig. 1 #125) is configured to: temporarily store the parcels (Col. 3 lines 7-22) in response to detection of a full container condition (Col. 5 lines 23-32) or a no container condition (Col. 5 lines 47-56); and discharge the parcels (Col. 7 lines 21-30) in response to detection of a correct container condition (Col. 7 lines 8-18). Regarding claim 9, Mohammed (US 11027923) teaches the bin multiplexing system of claim 3, further comprising one or more automated guided vehicles (Col. 5 lines 41-46, “robotic mover”) configured for automatically exchanging filled ones of the one or more output containers for a respective an empty output container (Col. 5 lines 41-46). Regarding claim 10, Mohammed (US 11027923) teaches the bin multiplexing system of claim 1, wherein the plurality of sorting containers (Fig. 1 #130) comprises one or more output containers (Col. 2 lines 39-41). 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 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mohammed (US 11027923) in view of Fortenbery (US 6095314). Regarding claim 4, Mohammed (US 11027923) lacks teaching the bin multiplexing system of claim 3, further comprising an angled chamber positioned between the plurality of intermediate bins and the one or more output containers, wherein the angled chamber is configured to direct the parcels toward the one or more output containers. Fortenbery (US 6095314) teaches the bin multiplexing system (Col. 5 lines 56-65, each “multi-cell chute”), further comprising an angled chamber (Fig. 2 ‘A’, ‘B’, ‘C’, Col. 4 lines 1-10) positioned between the plurality of intermediate bins and the one or more output containers (Fig. 2 ‘A’, ‘B’, ‘C’ positioned between #13, 14, 15 and #13’, 14’, 15’), wherein the angled chamber is configured to direct the parcels toward the one or more output containers (Col. 3 line 59-Col. 4 line 10). Fortenbery (US 6095314) explains that the angled chambers capture the articles and may hold the articles until they are discharged (Col. 3 lines 4-6), and states that the angled chambers provide for transitioning the articles and further guiding and directing the articles as they move from the sorter conveyor, and may have a variety of orientations to ensure the articles do not become stuck (Col. 4 lines 1-10). 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 Mohammed (US 11027923) to include an angled chamber positioned between the plurality of intermediate bins and the one or more output containers, wherein the angled chamber is configured to direct the parcels toward the one or more output containers as taught by Fortenbery (US 6095314) in order to transition and guide the parcels into the output containers in an orientation to ensure the parcels do not become stuck. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 , 3-6 and 10 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. Applicant's arguments regarding the teachings of Fortenbery have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding the Applicant’s argument that Fortenbery fails to disclose or suggest multiple diverter mechanisms operably coupled to the conveyor belt, each diverter mechanism configured to move one or more parcels from the conveyor belt and configured to provide in-line sorting, the Examiner would like to clarify that Fortenbery teaches this feature by stating “The sorter may include other diverters for moving packages off the conveyor belt and into the other three chutes illustrated in Fig. 1” (Col. 2 lines 43-46) and “the sorter controller pivots the diverter at its pivot point as shown by the arrow. Eventually the conveyor belt moves the package until it contacts the vertical surface of the diverter which guides the package into the chute” (Col. 2 lines 50-54). Conclusion 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 17, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 13, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Jul 17, 2025
Response Filed
Aug 06, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Nov 06, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Nov 15, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 01, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600581
SORTING METHOD AND DEVICE FOR SORTING PLATE-SHAPED OBJECTS, PREFERABLY GLASS PANEL CUT PIECES, METHOD AND DEVICE FOR PRODUCING GLASS PANEL CUT PIECES WITH A SORTING DEVICE OF THIS TYPE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599914
CENTRALIZED CONTROL OF MULTIPLE SORTING FACILITIES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599935
OPTIMIZATION OF SORTATION ORDER RECEPTACLE FILLING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12582997
DEVICE FOR MANIPULATING MAGNETIC BEADS AND ASSAY METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583017
CLASSIFICATION DEVICE AND SHOT PROCESSING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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
67%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+33.2%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 216 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