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 .
Status of Claims
This is a nonfinal rejection in response to preliminary amendments filed on 09/18/2024. Claims 1-12, and 14-16 are pending and are examined herein. Claim 13 is cancelled.
Priority
This application is a 35 U.S.C. 371 application of PCT/EP2023/056908 filed on March, 17, 2023 (“Parent Application”).
Additionally, acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copies of the priority documents have been received. The claims are entitled the benefit of the following European Patent Applications:
- EP application #22162950 filed on March 18, 2022, with an availability date of March 21, 2022
- EP application #22163005 filed on March 18, 2022, with an availability date of March 21, 2022
- EP application #22163003 filed on March 18, 2022, with an availability date of March 21, 2022
- EP application #22167945 filed on Apr 12, 2022, with an availability date of Apr 13, 2022
- EP application #22162951 filed on March 18, 2022, with an availability date of March 21, 2022
- EP application #22163004 filed on March 18, 2022, with an availability date of March 21, 2022
- EP application #22162988 filed on March 18, 2022, with an availability date of March 21, 2022
Therefore, the earliest effective filing date is March 21, 2022.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/18/2024 was filed after the mailing date of the claims filed on 09/18/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Provisional Non-Statutory Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-12, and 14-16 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-16 and 18 of the claim set dated 11/20/2025 of copending Application No. 18/839,769 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the examined application claims are anticipated by the claims of the reference application. This type of nonstatutory double patenting situation arises when the claim being examined is, for example, generic to a species or sub-genus claimed in a conflicting patent or application, i.e., the entire scope of the reference claim falls within the scope of the examined claim. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. The entire scope of claims 1-16 and 18 of the reference application fall within the scope of the examined claims, as demonstrated in the chart below:
#
Examined Claim: Present Application
#
Copending Application No. 18/839,769 (reference app.)
Comments
1
A computer-implemented method for operating a product recycling process for recycling of materials contained in products associated with at least one product identifier, the method comprising the steps of:
1
A computer-implemented method for operating a battery recycling process for recycling of materials contained in batteries associated with at least one battery identifier, the method comprising the steps of:
The differences between the examined claim and copending claim are that “battery” has been substituted for “product.” However, since “battery” from the reference application falls within the scope of “product,” the examined claims are anticipated by the claims of the reference application.
1
providing at least one product identifier and corresponding material configuration data associated with at least one component of the product to be recycled;
1
providing the at least one battery identifier and corresponding material configuration data associated with at least one component of a battery to be recycled;
1
determining at least one material identifier package by relating the at least one material configuration provided by the material configuration data to at least one material configuration processable or to be processed by at least one plant;
1
determining at least one material identifier package by relating at least one material configuration provided by the corresponding material configuration data to at least one material configuration processable by at least one plant,
The wherein clause in the copending application falls within the scope of the examined claims, therefore, the examined claims are still anticipated by the claims of the reference application.
1
providing the at least one material identifier package usable for recycling of materials contained in products including the at least one product identifier; and
1
wherein the at least one material identifier package includes the at least one battery identifier and one or more processing requirements associated with the at least one material configuration;
The providing step, as of 11/20/2025, is no longer present in the reference application, however, the claims remain patentably indistinct because the step of “providing” the “material identifier package” is inherent to the operating using the at least one material identifier package. In other words, the operating step inherently provides the at least one material identifier package.
1
operating based on the at least one material identifier package the product recycling process for recycling of materials contained in products associated with the at least one product identifier.
1
Operating, using the at least one material identifier package, the at least one plant, the battery recycling process for recycling of materials contained in batteries associated with the at least one battery identifier according to one or more processing requirements.
The entire scope of this reference limitation fits with the scope of the examined limitation, because the examined application is a broader genus of the claims. Therefore, when viewing the entirety of examined claim 1, it is clear that though they are not patentably distinct from each other because the examined application claims are anticipated by the claims of the reference application
2
The method according to claim 1, wherein the material configuration data relates to the chemical composition of at least one component of the product.
2
The method according to claim 1, wherein the corresponding material configuration data relates to a chemical composition of an electrode active material.
“Electrode active material” falls within the scope of “at least one component of the product,” therefore, the examined claims are still a broader genus of the reference application.
3
The method according to claim 1, wherein the material configuration data associated with the material used to produce the product or the component of the product is provided by a decentral computing node associated with a producer producing or using the material.
3
The method according to claim 1, wherein material configuration data associated with a material used to produce the battery or a component of the battery is provided by a decentral computing node associated with a producer producing or using the material.
“Battery” falls within the scope of the “product” therefore, the examined claims are still a broader genus of the reference application.
4
The method according to claim 1, wherein the at least one material identifier package includes a gathering of product identifiers associated with products or components to be recycled and/or with the at least one material configuration processable or to be processed by at least one recycling plant.
4
The method according to claim 1, wherein the at least one material identifier package includes a gathering of battery identifiers associated with batteries or components to be recycled and/or with at least one material configuration processable by at least one recycling plant.
“Battery” falls within the scope of the “product” therefore, the examined claims are still a broader genus of the reference application.
5
The method according to claim 1, wherein the at least one material identifier package includes material composition data associated with the recycled material as produced from at least one recycled component of the product,
5
The method according to claim 1, wherein the at least one material identifier package includes material composition data associated with a recycled battery material as produced from at least one recycled component of the battery,
“Battery” falls within the scope of the “product” therefore, the examined claims are still a broader genus of the reference application.
5
wherein the material composition data is determined from the product identifiers and their corresponding material configuration data.
5
wherein the material composition data is determined from battery identifiers and their corresponding material configuration data.
“Battery” falls within the scope of the “product” therefore, the examined claims are still a broader genus of the reference application.
6
The method according to claim 1, wherein determining the at least one material identifier package includes classification according to classification instructions providing the material configuration(s) processable or to be processed by at least one plant.
6
The method according to claim 1, wherein determining the at least one material identifier package further comprises classifying according to classification instructions providing the material configuration(s) processable by the at least one plant.
The examined claims are anticipated by the reference claims.
7
The method according to claim 1, wherein determining the at least one material identifier package includes providing classification instructions running in an at least partially decentral computing environment
7
The method according to claim 1, wherein determining the at least one material identifier package further comprises providing classification instructions running in an at least partially decentral computing environment,
The examined claims are anticipated by the reference claims.
7
wherein the classification instructions gather product identifiers according to material configuration(s) processable or to be processed by at least one recycling plant.
7
wherein the classification instructions gather battery identifiers according to material configuration(s) processable by at least one recycling plant.
The examined claims are anticipated by the reference claims.
8
The method according to claim 1, wherein the product identifier is provided from a sensor reading a product identifier element,
8
The method according to claim 1, wherein the at least one battery identifier is provided from a sensor reading a battery identifier element,
“Battery” falls within the scope of the “product” therefore, the examined claims are still a broader genus of the reference application.
8
wherein the product identifier element is physically connected to the product or at least one component of the product to be recycled
8
wherein the at least one battery identifier element is physically connected to the at least one component of the battery to be recycled.
“Battery” falls within the scope of the “product” therefore, the examined claims are still a broader genus of the reference application.
9
The method according to claim 1, wherein the material configuration data associated with the material used to produce the product or the at least one component of the product is accessed by a decentral computing node associated with one or more recycling system(s) or associated with classification instructions.
9
The method according claim 1, wherein material configuration data associated with a material used to produce the battery or the at least one component of the battery is accessed by a decentral computing node associated with one or more recycling system(s) or associated with classification instructions.
“Battery” falls within the scope of the “product” therefore, the examined claims are still a broader genus of the reference application.
10
The method according to claim 1, wherein the recycling process is operated by providing the material identifier package for controlling and/or monitoring recycling system(s)
10
The method according to claim 1, wherein the battery recycling process is operated by providing the at least one material identifier package for controlling and/or monitoring recycling system(s).
“Battery” falls within the scope of the “product” therefore, the examined claims are still a broader genus of the reference application.
11
An apparatus for operating a product recycling process for recycling of materials contained in products associated with at least one product identifier, the apparatus comprising: one or more computing nodes;
11
An apparatus for operating a battery recycling process for recycling of materials contained in batteries associated with at least one battery identifier, the apparatus comprising: one or more computing nodes;
11
and one or more computer-readable media having thereon computer-executable instructions that are structured such that, when executed by the one or more computing nodes, cause the apparatus to perform the following steps:
11
and one or more computer-readable media having thereon computer-executable instructions that are structured such that, when executed by the one or more computing nodes, cause the apparatus to perform the following steps:
11
providing at least one product identifier and corresponding material configuration data associated with at least one component of the product to be recycled;
11
providing the at least one battery identifier and corresponding material configuration data associated with at least one component of a battery to be recycled;
11
determining at least one material identifier package by relating the at least one material configuration provided by the material configuration data to at least one material configuration processable or to be processed by at least one plant;
11
determining at least one material identifier package by relating at least one material configuration provided by the corresponding material configuration data to at least one material configuration processable by at least one plant,
The wherein clause in the copending application falls within the scope of the examined claims, therefore, the examined claims are still anticipated by the claims of the reference application.
11
providing the at least one material identifier package usable for recycling of materials contained in products including the at least one product identifier; and
11
wherein the at least one material identifier package includes the at least one battery identifier and one or more processing requirements associated with the at least one material configuration;
The providing step, as of 11/20/2025, is no longer present in the reference application, however, the claims remain patentably indistinct because the step of “providing” the “material identifier package” is inherent to the operating using the at least one material identifier package. In other words, the operating step inherently provides the at least one material identifier package.
11
operating based on the at least one material identifier package the product recycling process for recycling of materials contained in products associated with the at least one product identifier.
11
Operating, using the at least one material identifier package, the at least one plant, the battery recycling process for recycling of materials contained in batteries associated with the at least one battery identifier according to one or more processing requirements.
The entire scope of this reference limitation fits with the scope of the examined limitation, because the examined application is a broader genus of the claims. Therefore, when viewing the entirety of examined claim 1, it is clear that though they are not patentably distinct from each other because the examined application claims are anticipated by the claims of the reference application
12
A method for using a product comprising at least one product identifier element comprising
12
A method for using a battery including at least one battery identifier element, the method including using the battery in the method according to claim 1
“Battery” falls within the scope of the “product” therefore, the examined claims are still a broader genus of the reference application.
12
providing a product identifier by reading the product identifier element
8
wherein the at least one battery identifier is provided from a sensor reading a battery identifier element,
“Battery” falls within the scope of the “product” therefore, the examined claims are still a broader genus of the reference application.
12
and generating at least one material identifier package according to claim 1.
1
determining at least one material identifier package
Since “generating” lacks antecedent basis as described in the 112(b) rejection, for purposes of compact prosecution it has been interpreted to hold the same scope as the determining step from claim 1. Therefore, the claims remain patentably indistinct.
14
A method for sorting, collecting, transporting, storing and/or recycling at least one component of a product to be recycled, the method comprising the steps: providing at least one material identifier package according to the method of claim 1
14
A method for sorting, collecting, transporting, storing and/or recycling the at least one component of the battery to be recycled, the method comprising the steps: providing the at least one material identifier package according to claim 1;
14
operating the recycling process based on the at least one material identifier package by generating sorting, collecting, transporting, storing and/or recycling instructions based on the provided material identifier package
14
operating the recycling process based on the at least one material identifier package by generating sorting, collecting, transporting, storing and/or recycling instructions based on the provided at least one material identifier package,
14
and providing sorting, collecting, transport, storing and/or recycling instructions for monitoring and/or controlling recycling system(s).
14
and providing sorting, collecting, transport, storing and/or recycling instructions for monitoring and/or controlling recycling system(s).
15
Computer element with instructions, which, when executed by at least one computing nodes of a computing environment, are configured to carry out the steps of the method according to claim 1.
15
At least one non-transitory storage medium having stored thereon computer-executable instructions, which, when executed by at least one processor of a computing environment, cause the at least one processor to carry out the steps of the method according to claim 1.
The claims are patentably indistinct because the “non-transitory storage medium” falls within the scope of the broadly interpreted “computer element,” and the “processor” falls within the scope of “computing nodes.”
16
Computer element with instructions, which, when executed by at least one computing nodes of a computing environment, are configured to carry out the steps as provided by the apparatus of claim 11.
15
At least one non-transitory storage medium having stored thereon computer-executable instructions, which, when executed by at least one processor of a computing environment, cause the at least one processor to carry out the steps of the method according to claim 1.
Since the steps of the method of claim 1 and apparatus of claim 11 hold the exact same scope, the claims are patentably indistinct because the “non-transitory storage medium” falls within the scope of the broadly interpreted “computer element,” and the “processor” falls within the scope of “computing nodes.”
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description:
-Fig. 2 reference numbers 188 and 189 are not mentioned in the specification.
-Fig. 3C “112” is not found in the specification.
-Fig. 3D “322” is not mentioned in the specification.
-Fig. 14 “1412,” and “1414” are found in the specification.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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.
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 12 and 14 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 are indefinite because they fail to clearly point out and distinctly claim the entirety of the claim it depends on, and it is indefinite whether it is the same method as recited in claim 1. Firstly, the claims recite “a method for using a product,” (claim 12) and “A method for sorting, collecting...,” which are not inherently indefinite under 112(b), however, the format of making reference to the limitation results in confusion because it is not clear whether the “generating at least one material identifier package according to claim 1”(claim 12) further limits claim 1 or adds a new step of “generating.” Similarly, it is indefinite as to whether the “providing at least one material identifier package according to the method of claim 1;”(claim 14) step further limits the providing step in claim 1, or if it is a different process.
MPEP 2173.05(f) states, “A claim which makes reference to a preceding claim to define a limitation is an acceptable claim construction which should not necessarily be rejected as improper or confusing under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. For example, claims which read: "The product produced by the method of claim 1." or "A method of producing ethanol comprising contacting amylose with the culture of claim 1 under the following conditions ....." are not indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, merely because of the reference to another claim. See also Ex parte Porter, 25 USPQ2d 1144 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1992) (where reference to "the nozzle of claim 7" in a method claim was held to comply with 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph). However, where the format of making reference to limitations recited in another claim results in confusion, then a rejection would be proper under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.”
In order to solve the discrepancy, the applicant is advised to amend claims 12 and 14 such that they avoid confusion in whether the scope of claim 1 is further limited. For example, claim 12 may read “The method of claim 1, further comprising: using the product comprising at least one product identifier element, providing the product identifier by reading the product identifier element, and generating the at least one material identifier package.” Similarly, claim 14 may read “The method of claim 1, further comprising: providing the at least one material identifier package, wherein operating the recycling process based on the at least one material identifier package comprises generating sorting, collecting, transporting, storing, and/or recycling instructions based on the provided material identifier package, and providing sorting, collecting, transport, storing and/or recycling instructions for monitoring and/or controlling recycling system(s).
The recommendations above provided by the examiner are not required, and the applicant may either traverse the rejection or amend the claims in any manner that would overcome the indefiniteness of the claims.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 12, 14, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 12 does not necessarily include all of the steps of claim 1 because the only mention of claim 1 is “generating at least one material identifier according to claim 1,” which does not require all of the limitations of claim 1.
Similarly, claim 14 only mentions the “providing at least one material identifier package according to the method of claim 1” but does not include all of the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Furthermore, claim 14 also changes the scope of the claim, by changing the preamble to optionally include “recycling” wherein claim 1 requires “operating a product recycling process.” Since claim 14 recites a “method for sorting, collecting, transporting, storing, and/or recycling at least one component of a product to be recycled,” it changes the scope of claim 1.
Finally, claim 16 recites a “computer element with instructions, which, when executed by at least one computing nodes of a computing environment, are configured to carry out the steps as provided by the apparatus of claim 11.” However, the claim only requires the steps provided by the apparatus of claim 11, and fails to include the structure of claim 11 including “one or more computer-readable media having thereon computer-executable instructions that are structured.” This is also of improper dependent form.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements. The recommended amendments provided by the examiner in the 112(b) would also overcome this rejection, therefore, please refer to the recommended amendments above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 15, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claims are not directed to a process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. The claims recite a “computer element,” which when given its broadest reasonable interpretation in view of the specification, recites any element related to a computer. In that case, the scope of the claims includes transitory forms of signal transmission (often referred to as “signals per se”), such a propagating electrical or electromagnetic signal or carrier wave. MPEP 2106.03(1), states “Even when a product has a physical or tangible form, it may not fall within a statutory category. For instance, a transitory signal, while physical and real, does not possess concrete structure that would qualify as a device or part under the definition of a machine, is not a tangible article or commodity under the definition of a manufacture (even though it is man-made and physical in that it exists in the real world and has tangible causes and effects), and is not composed of matter such that it would qualify as a composition of matter. Nuijten, 500 F.3d at 1356-1357, 84 USPQ2d at 1501-03. As such, a transitory, propagating signal does not fall within any statutory category.”
In order to overcome this rejection, the claims must be limited to exclude any transitory forms of signal, for example the claims can recite a “non-transitory computer readable storage medium,” in place of a “computer element” or any other recitation that would fall within any statutory category. For purposes of compact prosecution, the claims are reanalyzed under the full two-step process as if they passed step 1.
Claims 1-12 and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1: Is the claim to a Process, Machine, Manufacture, or Composition of Matter
The independent claims 1 and 11 are treated as the representative claims for the 2-step analysis. The dependent claims will be reanalyzed after the initial 2-step analysis on the independent claims. The representative claims are directed to:
Claims 1-10 : A computer-implemented method for operating a product recycling process for recycling of materials contained in products associated with at least one product identifier, the method comprising the steps of:
Claim 11: An apparatus for operating a product recycling process for recycling of materials contained in products associated with at least one product identifier, the apparatus comprising: one or more computing nodes; and one or more computer-readable media having thereon computer-executable instructions that are structured such that, when executed by the one or more computing nodes, cause the apparatus to perform the following steps:
Claim 12: A method for using a product comprising at least one product identifier element comprising providing a product identifier by reading the product identifier element and generating at least one material identifier package according to claim 1.
Claim 14: A method for sorting, collecting, transporting, storing and/or recycling at least one component of a product to be recycled, the method comprising the steps: providing at least one material identifier package according to the method of claim 1 operating the recycling process based on the at least one material identifier package by generating sorting, collecting, transporting, storing and/or recycling instructions based on the provided material identifier package and providing sorting, collecting, transport, storing and/or recycling instructions for monitoring and/or controlling recycling system(s).
Claim 15: Computer element with instructions, which, when executed by at least one computing nodes of a computing environment, are configured to carry out the steps of the method according to claim 1.
Claim 16: Computer element with instructions, which, when executed by at least one computing nodes of a computing environment, are configured to carry out the steps as provided by the apparatus of claim 11.
The claims above are directed to at least one of the potentially eligible subject matter categories, “process, machine, or manufacture” and are therefore to be further analyzed under step 2. Claims 15 and 16 technically do not pass step 1, but are reanalyzed under the full two-step process as if they passed step 1 for purposes of compact prosecution.
Step 2a Prong 1: Is the claim reciting a Judicial Exception(A Law of Nature, a Natural Phenomenon (Product of Nature), or An Abstract Idea?)
Claim 1 and 11 recite the following, wherein the abstract idea has been bolded and the additional elements are italicized:
Claim 1 Preamble: A computer-implemented method for operating a product recycling process for recycling of materials contained in products associated with at least one product identifier, the method comprising the steps of:
Claim 11 Preamble: An apparatus for operating a product recycling process for recycling of materials contained in products associated with at least one product identifier, the apparatus comprising: one or more computing nodes; and one or more computer-readable media having thereon computer-executable instructions that are structured such that, when executed by the one or more computing nodes, cause the apparatus to perform the following steps:
Claim 1 Body (also representative of claim 11 and applicable to claims 2-10, and 12-16):
- providing at least one product identifier and corresponding material configuration data associated with at least one component of the product to be recycled;
- determining at least one material identifier package by relating the at least one material configuration provided by the material configuration data to at least one material configuration processable or to be processed by at least one plant;
- providing the at least one material identifier package usable for recycling of materials contained in products including the at least one product identifier; and
- operating based on the at least one material identifier package the product recycling process for recycling of materials contained in products associated with the at least one product identifier.
When evaluating the bolded limitations of the claims under the broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification, it is clear that representative claims 1, and 11 recite an abstract idea within the category of “certain methods of organizing human activity.” This abstract idea grouping found in MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II) includes concepts related to “fundamental economic principles or practices,” “commercial or legal interactions,” and “managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people.” The present invention falls under “commercial or legal interactions” which include agreements in the form of contracts, legal obligations, advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors, and business relations. The claims in bold above at least recite an abstract idea because the steps fall within “commercial or legal interactions,” wherein the interactions are recited with such generality that they encompass instructions to an individual to carry out the “product recycling process.” Given its broadest reasonable interpretation in view of the specification, the claims are broad enough to encapsulate any operation of a recycling process subsequent to data analysis steps of “providing...”, “determining...”, and “providing...,” therefore the claims are merely reciting the outcome of determining the material identifier package and product recycling process based on a product identifier and stored material configuration data. This merely recites the idea of carrying out the business relations or commercial interactions, without specific technical steps. Therefore, the steps in bold recite at least “certain methods of organizing human activity.”
In addition to reciting “certain methods of organizing human activity,” the steps also fall under mental processes (thinking) that "can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper" to be an abstract idea according to MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III). The steps in bold merely recite “observations, evaluations, judgments, and opinions” that can be practically performed in the human mind with a physical aid. For example, an individual may be provided a product identifier and corresponding material data, and mentally “determine” the corresponding material identifier package to be processed by at least one plant. The claims are merely “collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis” where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind. Even operating the product recycling process can be performed by a human since it does not provide a specific type of recycling process that can be practically be performed in the human mind.
Therefore, the claims recite at least one abstract idea and are to be further analyzed under Step 2A Prong 2.
Step 2A Prong 2: Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application?
Claims 1, 11, 12, and 14-16 recite the following additional elements:
- computer-implemented method in claim 1
- apparatus comprising: one or more computing nodes; in claim 11
- one or more computer-readable media having thereon computer-executable instructions that are structured such that, when executed by the one or more computing nodes, cause the apparatus to perform the following steps: in claim 11
- Computer element with instructions, which, when executed by at least one computing nodes of a computing environment, are configured to carry out the steps of the method according to claim 1. In claim 15
- Computer element with instructions, which, when executed by at least one computing nodes of a computing environment, are configured to carry out the steps as provided by the apparatus of claim 11. In claim 16
The additional elements are no more than a recitation of the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea or other exception on a generic computing device. In this case, the abstract idea of determining and carrying out a product recycling process is performed on generic computing components such as a computer, computing nodes, computer-readable media, and computer element. Since the claims merely recite the idea of the outcome or solution without providing a specific technical implementation, the claims are recited a high level of generality such that they are equivalent to “apply it.” (See MPEP 2106.05(f)). Even when considering the additional elements in combination, they are not recited at a level of specificity such that it would be apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art that an improvement to computer functionality or technology or a technical field is reflected within the scope of the claims. See MPEP 2106.05(a) for improvements to computer functionality, technology, or field of use.
Therefore, the claims are directed to an abstract idea without integration into a practical application.
Step 2B: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception?
Claims 1, 11, 12, and 14-16 recite the following additional elements:
- computer-implemented method in claim 1
- apparatus comprising: one or more computing nodes; in claim 11
- one or more computer-readable media having thereon computer-executable instructions that are structured such that, when executed by the one or more computing nodes, cause the apparatus to perform the following steps: in claim 11
- Computer element with instructions, which, when executed by at least one computing nodes of a computing environment, are configured to carry out the steps of the method according to claim 1. In claim 15
- Computer element with instructions, which, when executed by at least one computing nodes of a computing environment, are configured to carry out the steps as provided by the apparatus of claim 11. In claim 16
These additional elements have not been found to include significantly more for the same reasons set forth in the Prong 2 rejection, specifically because the additional elements are generic computing devices being used to carry out the abstract idea, as outlined in MPEP 2106.05(f). Furthermore, no improvements to these computing devices have been purported since they are generic computing components instructed to perform the abstract idea or are generic devices operating in their ordinary capacity. Even when viewed as a whole, nothing in the claims meaningfully limits the use of the abstract idea such that it is significantly more (an inventive concept). Therefore, the claims are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Dependent Claims 2-10, 12, and 14-16 have been analyzed, both individually and in combination with the claims they depend on, under the full 2-step eligibility analysis:
Claims 2, 4, 5 further limit the abstract idea by defining the type of information within the material identifier package such as “material configuration data relates to the chemical composition of at least one component of the product (claim 2),” “Gathering of product identifiers with products of components to be recycled with the material configuration processable by the recycling plant (claim 4), and “material composition data determined from the product identifiers and corresponding material configuration data.” This is more of the same abstract idea because these steps merely define the type of data collected/stored in the package, but the exchange of this information is still business relations as it is storing/providing business information, which still falls within “certain methods of organizing human activity.” No further additional elements have been added, therefore, even in combination with the previous additional elements, the claims are still equivalent to “apply it” or mere instructions to perform the abstract idea on a general purpose computer or generic computing components (MPEP 2106.05(f)). Even when viewed as a whole, nothing in the claims meaningfully limits the abstract idea such that it is significantly more (an inventive concept). Therefore, claims 2, 4, 5 are still patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 for being directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claims 3 and 9 further defines the abstract idea by merely limiting the source of the “material configuration data” to be provided from/or accessed by a “decentral computing node” associated with a producer. This is more of the same abstract idea but with the additional element of a “decentral computing node” which is still no more than a generic computing component in which the abstract idea is implemented. Even in combination with the previous additional elements, the claims are still equivalent to “apply it” or mere instructions to perform the abstract idea on a general purpose computer or generic computing components (MPEP 2106.05(f)). Even when viewed as a whole, nothing in the claims meaningfully limits the abstract idea such that it is significantly more (an inventive concept). Therefore, claims 3 and 9 still patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 for being directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claims 6 and 7 further limit the abstract idea by adding “classification instructions” to the material identifier package, which provide the material configuration processable by a plant, wherein in claim 7 the classification instructions gather product identifiers. This concept of “classification instructions” still falls under “certain methods of organizing human activity” because they are merely business relationships or mere instructions to perform “commercial or legal interactions” because they determine which materials can be processed by particular plants. The only further additional element is “partially decentral computing environment” in claim 7, which is merely a generic computing component in which the classification instructions are being performed on. Therefore, whether considering the additional elements individually or in combination with the previous additional elements, the claims are still equivalent to “apply it” or mere instructions to perform the abstract idea on a general purpose computer or generic computing components (MPEP 2106.05(f)). Even when viewed as a whole, nothing in the claims meaningfully limits the abstract idea such that it is significantly more (an inventive concept). Therefore, claims 6 and 7 are still patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 for being directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claim 8 merely adds the additional element of a “sensor” to read the product identifier element, wherein the product identifier element is physically connected to the product. This is more of the same abstract idea because it is merely storing or collecting information towards performing the abstract idea. The additional element of using a “sensor to read the product identifier element” is still an “apply it” element because it is no more than using a device in its ordinary capacity to perform data collection steps towards the abstract idea(using a sensor to scan a barcode attached to a product). Therefore, whether considering the additional elements individually or in combination with the previous additional elements, the claims are still equivalent to “apply it” or mere instructions to perform the abstract idea on a general purpose computer or generic computing components (MPEP 2106.05(f)). Even when viewed as a whole, nothing in the claims meaningfully limits the abstract idea such that it is significantly more (an inventive concept). Therefore, claim 8 is still patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 for being directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claim 10 further limits the abstract idea by limiting the “recycling process” to be operated by providing the material identifier package for controlling or monitoring recycling systems. However, the claims are still recited at such a high-level of generality that they are mere business relations, and the activity itself can be performed in the human mind (mental process). Nothing in the claims meaningfully limits how the material identifier package is related to the operation of the recycling process, nor do the steps recite a specific implementation to control or monitor recycling systems beyond what is capable in the human mind. There are no further additional elements to consider, and even in combination with the previous additional elements, the claims are still equivalent to “apply it” or mere instructions to perform the abstract idea on a general purpose computer or generic computing components (MPEP 2106.05(f)). Even when viewed as a whole, nothing in the claims meaningfully limits the abstract idea such that it is significantly more (an inventive concept). Therefore, claim 10 is still patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 for being directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claim 12 further limits the abstract idea by claiming a method for using the product, comprising at least one product identifier element comprising a product identifier by reading the product identifier element and generating at least one material identifier package. This is more of the same abstract idea of “certain methods of organizing human activity” as it still falls within the scope of business relations and the steps of “reading” the product identifier element and “generating” the material identifier package are recited at such a high level of generality that they can practically be performed in the human mind. There are no further additional elements to consider, and even in combination with the previous additional elements, the claims are still equivalent to “apply it” or mere instructions to perform the abstract idea on a general purpose computer or generic computing components (MPEP 2106.05(f)). Even when viewed as a whole, nothing in the claims meaningfully limits the abstract idea such that it is significantly more (an inventive concept). Therefore, claim 10 is still patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 for being directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claim 14 further limits the abstract idea by specifying that the recycling process results in “sorting, collecting, transporting, storing, and/or recycling instructions based on the provided material identifier package.” However, this is more of the same abstract idea because there is no positive recitation of actual steps for sorting, collecting, etc; it is merely a series of instructions to an individual or business entity to perform the steps. Even when considering that the recycling process now involves steps for sorting, collecting, transporting...these instructions can still be practically performed in the human mind, without or without a physical aid. There are no further additional elements to consider, and even in combination with the previous additional elements, the claims are still equivalent to “apply it” or mere instructions to perform the abstract idea on a general purpose computer or generic computing components (MPEP 2106.05(f)). Even when viewed as a whole, nothing in the claims meaningfully limits the abstract idea such that it is significantly more (an inventive concept). Therefore, claim 10 is still patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 for being directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claims 15 and 16 merely add the additional element of the steps of claim 1 and 11 respectively being carried out on a “Computer element with instructions, which, when executed by at least one computing nodes of a computing environment, are configured to carry out the steps of the method.” The abstract idea remains unchanged because the steps from claim 1 and claim 11 remain the same. The additional element of the computer element, with instructions carried out on computing nodes of a computing environment is still equivalent to “apply it” because it is merely instructing the steps to be performed on generic computing component. Therefore, whether considering the additional elements individually or in combination with the previous additional elements, the claims are still equivalent to “apply it” or mere instructions to perform the abstract idea on a general purpose computer or generic computing components (MPEP 2106.05(f)). Even when viewed as a whole, nothing in the claims meaningfully limits the abstract idea such that it is significantly more (an inventive concept). Therefore, claims 15 and 16 are still patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 for being directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
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 1-12, and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Stöcker et al. (US 20190295045 A1) hereinafter Stöcker.
Regarding Claims 1 and 11:
Stöcker discloses. Stöcker teaches:
Claim 1 Preamble: A computer-implemented method for operating a product recycling process for recycling of materials contained in products associated with at least one product identifier, the method comprising the steps of: (Stöcker [0012] A raw material and/or recycling system according to the present application is configured to enable an efficient recycling of any produced and/or used recyclable material element. A recyclable material element is any element (e.g. a liquid material or a solid material or gaseous material) which can (and should) be recycled. [0013] The present system comprises at least one recyclable material element processing unit at least in form of at least one tagging unit. The tagging unit is configured to provide at least identifier to at least one recyclable material element. This means that an identifier is (uniquely) associated and linked, respectively, with a recyclable material element. Preferably, each recyclable material element can be provided with a respective identifier. [0078] A further aspect of the present application is a method for operating a raw material and/or recycling system, in particular, a previously described raw material and/or recycling system.)
Claim 11 Preamble: An apparatus for operating a product recycling process for recycling of materials contained in products associated with at least one product identifier, the apparatus comprising: one or more computing nodes; (Stöcker [0011] In contrast to prior art systems, registering recyclable material elements and maintaining their data can be conducted in a more efficient and more secure way by at least executing a registering means by at least a part (e.g. >1) of the nodes of a peer-to-peer network. In other words, a raw material and/or recycling system can be managed and controlled without a central instance but by a peer-to-peer application of a peer-to-peer network. By the fact that instead of a central server or a platform, a peer-to-peer network (also called a framework) undertakes the in particular tamper-proof controlling of the raw material and/or recycling system, by means of a peer-to-peer application, high security standards are achieved in that all computers (peer nodes or simply nodes) in the peer-to-peer network, at least a part of the nodes in the peer-to-peer network, at least monitor(s) preferably each process, in particular, by executing e.g. the registering means.)
- and one or more computer-readable media having thereon computer-executable instructions that are structured such that, when executed by the one or more computing nodes, cause the apparatus to perform the following steps: (Stöcker [0085] Generally, a module or means can be formed by software and/or hardware. An unit can comprise hardware (processor, memory, etc.) and/or software (operating system, etc.). [0053] In a further embodiment, executable means of an external computing device controlled by the peer-to-peer application may include algorithm(s) for de-central cognitive analytics, artificial intelligence or machine learning. Analytics and learning can be shared with other entities, aggregated and further analyzed via the peer-to-peer application(s).)
Claim 1 Body (also representative of the body of claim 12):
- providing at least one product identifier and corresponding material configuration data associated with at least one component of the product to be recycled; (Stöcker [0031] The recyclable material element processing unit may comprise at least one of a further status detecting tool and a reading tool configured to detect the identifier provided to the recyclable material element. At least one further peer-to-peer module may be assigned to the further recyclable material element processing unit and may be configured to provide at least the detected identifier and at least one further status parameter data set to the peer-to-peer application [0034] For instance, based on a detected identifier of a (used) recyclable material element the corresponding treatment parameter data set can be received from the peer-to-peer application. For instance, based on a request message comprising the detected identifier, the peer-to-peer application may send a response comprising the respective treatment parameter data set. [0032] Examples of treatment parameter(s) include information about the composition/ingredients (e.g. in percent by weight per ingredient) of the recyclable material element,) The “product to be recycled” is Stöcker’s “recyclable material element.” The treatment parameter data includes information about the composition/ingredients, thus the limitation is satisfied.
- determining at least one material identifier package by relating the at least one material configuration provided by the material configuration data to at least one material configuration processable or to be processed by at least one plant; (Stöcker [0151] The present block chain 422 is particularly adapted to receive messages, such as messages comprising an identifier (provided to a recyclable material element or detected from a recyclable material element) and/or status parameter data set(s), treatment parameter data set(s), authentication result(s), etc., from a peer-to-peer module of a previously described recyclable material element processing unit. [0024] Preferably, further data can be stored in the registry storage and/or a further created storage (e.g. a digital product memory) linked to the respective identifier of a product in order to store data about a product comprising one or more recyclable material elements. The digital product memory (or the additionally stored data) may store any kind of data about the product, a list of (one or more) recyclable material element(s) or product component(s) and/or treatment parameter(s). It shall be understood that the treatment parameter(s) can also comprise instructions how to decompose a product into components/recyclable material elements that can be recycled individually, as will be explained hereinafter. Each of the product components might have its own identifier. [0137] The recycling unit 336 may have one or more recycling tools 352. For instance, a recycling tool 352 may be a cleaning tool configured to clean a used/returned container 306.3. [0140] Then, the recycling tool 352 can be (automatically) operated at least based on the received treatment parameter data set e.g. comprising allowed (and/or optimal) cleaning agent(s), maximum allowed (and/or optimal) cleaning temperature, or any other physical, chemical, biological treatment rules, etc. [0034] A further peer-to-peer module assigned to the recycling unit may be at least configured to receive the stored treatment parameter data set related to the recyclable material element (to be processed) from the peer-to-peer application. The recycling unit may be configured to analyze the received treatment parameter data set in order to provide each of the recycling tool(s) of the recycling unit with the respective one or more treatment parameter(s).) The broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) in view of the specification of “material identifier package,” according to page 8 of the specification is any data structure including data for collecting, sorting, transporting, instructions, component identifiers, product classification data, operation and processing requirement data. In other words “material identifier package” is interpreted to be any dataset accompanying a recycle material element which informs an allocation of products or components to be recycled. Therefore, the digital product memory of Stöcker which includes both the “status parameter data set,” and “treatment parameter data set” falls within the scope of material identifier package. The “relating” limitation is satisfied in [0034] because the treatment parameters are provided in line with the available recycling tools and the appropriate rules for the particular material.
- providing the at least one material identifier package usable for recycling of materials contained in products including the at least one product identifier; and(Stöcker [0130] A further peer-to-peer module 314.2 to 314.5 may provide a further status parameter data set (e.g. ‘newly produced’, identifier of the production unit 330, identifier(s) of the used production tool(s), etc.) and, preferably, at least one treatment parameter data set to the peer-to-peer application 322.)
- operating based on the at least one material identifier package the product recycling process for recycling of materials contained in products associated with the at least one product identifier. (Stöcker [0140] Then, the recycling tool 352 can be (automatically) operated at least based on the received treatment parameter data set e.g. comprising allowed (and/or optimal) cleaning agent(s), maximum allowed (and/or optimal) cleaning temperature, or any other physical, chemical, biological treatment rules, etc. [0141] Another example of a recycling tool 352 may be a tool for regaining the used starting materials 354 from the used container 306.3 e.g. by a heating and sorting process. Such a tool may (also) be operated at least based on the received treatment parameter data set e.g. comprising the originally used starting material, weighting specifications (e.g. percent by weight), etc.)
Regarding Claim 2:
Stöcker teaches The method according to claim 1,
- wherein the material configuration data relates to the chemical composition of at least one component of the product. (Stöcker [0012] A raw material and/or recycling system according to the present application is configured to enable an efficient recycling of any produced and/or used recyclable material element. A recyclable material element is any element (e.g. a liquid material or a solid material or gaseous material) which can (and should) be recycled. Non-exhaustive examples of typical recyclable material element comprises any kind of containers or packages, any kind of electronic devices, any kind of cloths, any kind of waste products in the manufacturing industry, plastic materials, chemicals, fuels, metals, biological substance, etc. [130] A treatment parameter data set can comprise information about the used starting material(s) of a produced container 306 (e.g. chemical formula of each starting material/ingredient and their respective portion (e.g. percent by weight)),)
Regarding Claim 3:
Stöcker teaches The method according to claim 1,
- wherein the material configuration data associated with the material used to produce the product or the component of the product is provided by a decentral computing node associated with a producer producing or using the material. (Stöcker [0109] The peer-to-peer application 224 may be configured to manage and control the raw material and/or recycling system 200. [0112] Such a peer-to-peer module 214 is configured to provide (only) access to the peer-to-peer application 222 e.g. via an API (application programming interface). Each peer-to-peer module 214 (also a node or light node) may comprise a decentral application and at least an API. [0127] A first recyclable material element processing unit 330 may be a production unit 330. The production unit 330 of a production entity (e.g. fabric) may comprise one or more producing tool(s) 331 configured to produce one or more container(s) 306. [0130] A further peer-to-peer module 314.2 to 314.5 may provide a further status parameter data set (e.g. ‘newly produced’, identifier of the production unit 330, identifier(s) of the used production tool(s), etc.) and, preferably, at least one treatment parameter data set to the peer-to-peer application 322. A treatment parameter data set can comprise information about the used starting material(s) of a produced container 306 (e.g. chemical formula of each starting material/ingredient and their respective portion (e.g. percent by weight)),) The peer-to-peer module, of the production unit provides the status parameter data set(including the starting materials of a produced container). Therefore, the limitation has been satisfied.
Regarding Claim 4:
Stöcker teaches The method according to claim 1,
- wherein the at least one material identifier package includes a gathering of product identifiers associated with products or components to be recycled and/or with the at least one material configuration processable or to be processed by at least one recycling plant. (Stöcker [0024] Preferably, further data can be stored in the registry storage and/or a further created storage (e.g. a digital product memory) linked to the respective identifier of a product in order to store data about a product comprising one or more recyclable material elements. The digital product memory (or the additionally stored data) may store any kind of data about the product, a list of (one or more) recyclable material element(s) or product component(s) and/or treatment parameter(s). It shall be understood that the treatment parameter(s) can also comprise instructions how to decompose a product into components/recyclable material elements that can be recycled individually, as will be explained hereinafter. Each of the product components might have its own identifier. [0034] A further peer-to-peer module assigned to the recycling unit may be at least configured to receive the stored treatment parameter data set related to the recyclable material element (to be processed) from the peer-to-peer application) Stöcker [0024] teaches the gathering of product identifiers associated with products or components (a list of recyclable material elements.) [0034] teaches the product identifiers associated with the at least one material configuration to be processed by at least one recycling plant (to be processed). Therefore, the limitation is satisfied.
Regarding Claim 5:
Stöcker teaches The method according to claim 1,
- wherein the at least one material identifier package includes material composition data associated with the recycled material as produced from at least one recycled component of the product, (Stöcker [0142] A cleaned container 306.4 can e.g. be forwarded to the tagging unit e.g. in order to re-register the container 306.4 or to a filling station (then the same code element and identifier, respectively, can be maintained). A regained starting material 354 can e.g. be forwarded to the production unit 330 in order to produce a new container 306. [0130] A treatment parameter data set can comprise information about the used starting material(s) of a produced container 306) the “starting materials of a produced container,” satisfies “the recycled material as produced from at least one recycled component,” since the regained starting material is used to produce a new container.
- wherein the material composition data is determined from the product identifiers and their corresponding material configuration data. (Stöcker [0033] The registering means may be further configured to store at least one treatment parameter data set related to the recyclable material element together with the identifier of the recyclable material element in the registry storage. Since the registry storage can be inspected each interested entity can receive (e.g. based on the identifier of the recyclable material element) a desired treatment parameter data set e.g. in order to treat/process said recyclable material element. [0014] The tagging unit may be part of a production entity and/or distributing entity and/or a recycling entity. For instance, newly produced or recycled recyclable material element(s) can be provided with an identifier by the tagging unit.)
Regarding Claim 6:
Stöcker teaches The method according to claim 1,
- wherein determining the at least one material identifier package includes classification according to classification instructions providing the material configuration(s) processable or to be processed by at least one plant. (Stöcker [0136] The status detecting tool 344 may be configured to detect whether the returned container comprises crack(s), dirt particle(s), weight of the container or other undesired element(s) or conditions or the like. The peer-to-peer module 314.4 is configured to transmit the previously described data to the peer-to-peer application 322. The registering means 324 may store said data in the registry storage of the storage arrangement 326, as described above. Algorithms can be run on top of the data stored in the storage arrangement 326. The current status parameter data set of a returned container 306.3 may be taken into account by an accounting means based on a stored delivery transaction agreement.) The BRI of “classification” is any categorization of the materials into a class. Therefore, Stöcker’s status detecting tool is an example of classification, because it classifies the materials and conditions of the container. The “algorithms” falls within “classification instructions.” See [0130] for providing the material configuration(s) to be processed by at least one plant.
Regarding Claim 7:
Stöcker teaches The method according to claim 1,
- wherein determining the at least one material identifier package includes providing classification instructions running in an at least partially decentral computing environment(Stöcker [0070] It is noted that in the present case, according to an embodiment, the peer-to-peer module comprises at least an API configured to communicate with the peer-to-peer application, such as the block chain. In addition to the API, the peer-to-peer module comprises a decentral application of software comprising local algorithms at least configured to create and transmit data, such as status parameter data set(s), identifiers, treatment parameter data set(s), to the peer-to-peer application via the API. [0144] It shall be understood that there may be several intermediate units, such as transport units, storage units and the like. In a preferred embodiment, also these units can comprise a peer-to-peer module and one or more status detecting tool(s), in particular, configured to detect one or more current status parameter(s) of the container(s). The respective peer-to-peer modules may be configured to transmit the respective status parameter data sets and the respective (read out) identifier(s) of the container(s) to the peer-to-peer application 322 in order to log this data in the registry storage by the registering means 324.) Also see [0171] for analysis performed on nodes.
- wherein the classification instructions gather product identifiers according to material configuration(s) processable or to be processed by at least one recycling plant. (Stöcker [0137] The returned container 306.3 can be forwarded to a recycling unit 336 (e.g. by transporting units). The recycling unit 336 may have one or more recycling tools 352. For instance, a recycling tool 352 may be a cleaning tool configured to clean a used/returned container 306.3. Preferably, the peer-to-peer module 314.5 is configured to receive a treatment parameter data set related to the container 306.3 to be cleaned. For instance, a reading tool of the recycling unit 336 can detect the identifier of the container 306.3 to be cleaned. The detected identifier can be provided to the peer-to-peer application 322 by sending a treatment parameter request message by the peer-to-peer module 314.5. The peer-to-peer application 322 may comprise a (not shown) retrieving means configured to retrieve the treatment parameter data set stored in the registry storage and corresponding to the received identifier. Then, the retrieved treatment parameter data set can be provided to the requesting peer-to-peer module 314.5.) The identifiers of the containers to be cleaned are received by the recycling unit.
Regarding Claim 8:
Stöcker teaches The method according to claim 1,
- wherein the product identifier is provided from a sensor reading a product identifier element, (Stöcker [0025] According to a first embodiment of the system of the present application, the tagging unit may comprise at least one tagging tool configured to attach at least one readable code element comprising the identifier to the recyclable material element...In particular, the identifier can be read out by a reading tool, such as a RFID reader, NFC reader, barcode reader, etc. [0031] The recyclable material element processing unit may comprise at least one of a further status detecting tool and a reading tool configured to detect the identifier provided to the recyclable material element.)
- wherein the product identifier element is physically connected to the product or at least one component of the product to be recycled(Stöcker [0027] Attaching the code element can comprise incorporating the code element into the recyclable material element, mounting the code element onto recyclable material element at e.g. a wall of the recyclable material element and/or mounting the code element onto or incorporating the code element into a package of the recyclable material element. An identifier can be physically associated with a recyclable material element (or a container holding the element) and can be easily detected by recyclable material element processing unit(s) having suitable reading tool(s).)
Regarding Claim 9:
Stöcker teaches The method according to claim 1,
- wherein the material configuration data associated with the material used to produce the product or the at least one component of the product is accessed by a decentral computing node associated with one or more recycling system(s) or associated with classification instructions. (Stöcker [0022] The registry storage is updatable and, in particular, inspectable by at least a part of the participating entities/units of the system... Thereby, according to one embodiment, access to the data (preferably stored in encrypted form) can be controlled by the peer-to-peer application, in particular, an access controlling means of the peer-to-peer application. [0137] Preferably, the peer-to-peer module 314.5 is configured to receive a treatment parameter data set related to the container 306.3 to be cleaned. For instance, a reading tool of the recycling unit 336 can detect the identifier of the container 306.3 to be cleaned. The detected identifier can be provided to the peer-to-peer application 322 by sending a treatment parameter request message by the peer-to-peer module 314.5. The peer-to-peer application 322 may comprise a (not shown) retrieving means configured to retrieve the treatment parameter data set stored in the registry storage and corresponding to the received identifier. Then, the retrieved treatment parameter data set can be provided to the requesting peer-to-peer module 314.5. [0168] The nodes 504.1, 504.2 may correspond to tagging units and e.g. be formed by the respective first peer-to-peer modules of tagging units. The nodes 536.1, 536.2 may correspond to recycling units and e.g. be formed by the respective peer-to-peer modules of recycling units. Nodes 520.1 and 520.2 may be other nodes. It shall be understood that nodes can be full, remote or light nodes.) The reading tool of the recycling unit is an example of a decentral computing node associated with the recycling system, which accesses the material configuration data. Since the limitation contains an “or” clause, and the first condition has been met, the limitation is satisfied.
Regarding Claim 10:
Stöcker teaches The method according to claim 1,
- wherein the recycling process is operated by providing the material identifier package for controlling and/or monitoring recycling system(s) (Stöcker [0034] In order to optimize the operation of a recycling unit, at least one of the recycling tool(s) of the recycling unit can be operated/controlled based on at least one treatment parameter of a treatment parameter data set. For instance, based on a detected identifier of a (used) recyclable material element the corresponding treatment parameter data set can be received from the peer-to-peer application. For instance, based on a request message comprising the detected identifier, the peer-to-peer application may send a response comprising the respective treatment parameter data set. The recycling unit may be configured to analyze the received treatment parameter data set in order to provide each of the recycling tool(s) of the recycling unit with the respective one or more treatment parameter(s). [0138] In a further embodiment the recycling unit 336 may store recycling and treatment process data sets about the recycling process or recycling tool activities in the peer-to-peer application 322 (e.g. material input parameters, treatment parameters, material output parameters). The recycling and treatment process data sets can be used for reporting purposes, optimization purposes or for analytical purposes.) Controlling recycling systems is satisfied in [0034], and monitoring is satisfied in [0138] because the activities of the recycling tool are reported.
Regarding Claim 12:
Stöcker teaches:
- A method for using a product comprising at least one product identifier element comprising providing a product identifier by reading the product identifier element and generating at least one material identifier package according to claim 1. (Stöcker [0125] Preferably, each of the recyclable material element processing units 304, 330, 332, 334, 336 can comprise a (not shown for sake of clarity) reading tool, respectively, for detecting or reading out an identifier of a container 306 to 306.4. [0129] The first peer-to-peer module 314.1 may provide the identifier and a first status parameter data set (e.g. ‘used’ or ‘unused’, location, time-stamp, identifier of the tagging unit 304, etc.) to the peer-application 322. Then, the registering means 324 may be executed to register the container 306.1 by storing the received identifier and the first status parameter data set. [0130] A further peer-to-peer module 314.2 to 314.5 may provide a further status parameter data set (e.g. ‘newly produced’, identifier of the production unit 330, identifier(s) of the used production tool(s), etc.) and, preferably, at least one treatment parameter data set to the peer-to-peer application 322. A treatment parameter data set can comprise information about the used starting material(s) of a produced container 306 (e.g. chemical formula of each starting material/ingredient and their respective portion (e.g. percent by weight)), decomposition rule(s), allowed decomposition physical, chemical or biological processes, treating rule(s) or parameter(s), such as maximum allowed (cleaning) temperature, allowed cleaning material(s), physical material storage or transportations rules (e.g. for sensible or dangerous materials), etc. The registering means 324 can associate the received data set to the respective container 306.1 by means of the identifier of the container 306.1 and can store said additional data together with the identifier in the registry storage e.g. formed by a storage arrangement 326, as described above.) Reading the identifier in [0125], then creating a treatment parameter dataset satisfies the BRI of the limitation, which includes any use of the recycled product which consists of reading the product identifier element and generating “material identifier package” (treatment parameter data set).
Regarding Claim 14:
Stöcker teaches:
- A method for sorting, collecting, transporting, storing and/or recycling at least one component of a product to be recycled, the method comprising the steps: providing at least one material identifier package according to the method of claim 1(Stöcker [0140] Then, the recycling tool 352 can be (automatically) operated at least based on the received treatment parameter data set e.g. comprising allowed (and/or optimal) cleaning agent(s), maximum allowed (and/or optimal) cleaning temperature, or any other physical, chemical, biological treatment rules, etc. [0141] Another example of a recycling tool 352 may be a tool for regaining the used starting materials 354 from the used container 306.3 e.g. by a heating and sorting process. Such a tool may (also) be operated at least based on the received treatment parameter data set e.g. comprising the originally used starting material, weighting specifications (e.g. percent by weight), etc.) [0140] teaches a step of recycling at least of component of a product by providing the identifier package. [0141] teaches the same for sorting. See [0134] for collecting (returning). See [0137] for transporting. See [0030] for storage.
-operating the recycling process based on the at least one material identifier package by generating sorting, collecting, transporting, storing and/or recycling instructions based on the provided material identifier package(Stöcker [0034] A recycling tool may be configured to conduct at least a sub-process of the total recycling process of an used recyclable material element. Examples of such tools are heating tools, cooling tools, cleaning tools, mechanical decomposition tools, chemical decomposition tools, biological process tools, sorting tools, etc. In order to optimize the operation of a recycling unit, at least one of the recycling tool(s) of the recycling unit can be operated/controlled based on at least one treatment parameter of a treatment parameter data set. For instance, based on a detected identifier of a (used) recyclable material element the corresponding treatment parameter data set can be received from the peer-to-peer application. For instance, based on a request message comprising the detected identifier, the peer-to-peer application may send a response comprising the respective treatment parameter data set.) Also see [0130] for physical material storage or transportations rules (e.g. for sensible or dangerous materials), etc.
- and providing sorting, collecting, transport, storing and/or recycling instructions for monitoring and/or controlling recycling system(s). (Stöcker [0061] In addition, the block chain can be used to control and manage a raw material and/or recycling system. The block chain can be, in particular, used to execute predefinable process(es), e.g. registering process(es) or the like, caused by at least one peer-to-peer module and/or a previously described executable means in a tamper-proof manner. [0137] Preferably, the peer-to-peer module 314.5 is configured to receive a treatment parameter data set related to the container 306.3 to be cleaned. For instance, a reading tool of the recycling unit 336 can detect the identifier of the container 306.3 to be cleaned. [0140] Then, the recycling tool 352 can be (automatically) operated at least based on the received treatment parameter data set e.g. comprising allowed (and/or optimal) cleaning agent(s), maximum allowed (and/or optimal) cleaning temperature, or any other physical, chemical, biological treatment rules, etc.)
Regarding Claim 15:
Stöcker teaches:
- Computer element with instructions, which, when executed by at least one computing nodes of a computing environment, are configured to carry out the steps of the method according to claim 1. (Stöcker [0106] The depicted nodes 220.1, 220.2, 220.3 (each) comprise a peer-to-peer application 222. As can be seen from FIG. 2, the same peer-to-peer application 222 is preferably implemented on each node 220.1, 220.2, 220.3. This means, in particular, that the same content is comprised on each node 220.1, 220.2, 220.3 and that the same code (including one or more executable means 224) can be executed on each node 220.1, 220.2, 220.3. [0056] In a simple way, information can be made available to preferably all participants. This may allow to carry out a review of the information stored in the decentral register or the code and means, respectively, executed in the decentral register. Particularly preferably, each computer (node) in the peer-to-peer network can be configured to review new information, in particular, based on older information stored in the peer-to-peer application. [0086] The features of the methods, systems, modules, peer-to-peer applications, units, and computer programs can be freely combined with one another. In particular, features of the description and/or the dependent claims, even when the features of the dependent claims are completely or partially avoided, may be independently inventive in isolation or freely combinable with one another. ) Computer element is interpreted as any software with instructions carried out by computing nodes of the computing environment to perform the claimed functions.
Regarding Claim 16:
Stöcker teaches:
- Computer element with instructions, which, when executed by at least one computing nodes of a computing environment, are configured to carry out the steps of the method according to claim 1. (Stöcker [0106] The depicted nodes 220.1, 220.2, 220.3 (each) comprise a peer-to-peer application 222. As can be seen from FIG. 2, the same peer-to-peer application 222 is preferably implemented on each node 220.1, 220.2, 220.3. This means, in particular, that the same content is comprised on each node 220.1, 220.2, 220.3 and that the same code (including one or more executable means 224) can be executed on each node 220.1, 220.2, 220.3. [0056] In a simple way, information can be made available to preferably all participants. This may allow to carry out a review of the information stored in the decentral register or the code and means, respectively, executed in the decentral register. Particularly preferably, each computer (node) in the peer-to-peer network can be configured to review new information, in particular, based on older information stored in the peer-to-peer application. [0086] The features of the methods, systems, modules, peer-to-peer applications, units, and computer programs can be freely combined with one another. In particular, features of the description and/or the dependent claims, even when the features of the dependent claims are completely or partially avoided, may be independently inventive in isolation or freely combinable with one another. )
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
- Alon et al. (US 20240109227 A1) discloses introducing markers into recyclable materials which indicate the material components, type, percentage of material type, and determining the suitable recycling process based on the ingredient material component.
- O’Brien et al. (US 20210182801 A1) discloses a process of segregating, sterilizing, and purification of recycled plastic medical waste and producing plastic products from the recycled material.
- Pratt et al. (US 20230385848 A1) discloses a vehicle battery blockchain tracking system which stores recycling information such as recycling entity, requirements, processes, and parameters, and recyclable materials extractable from the battery.
- Sammy Kayara (US 20200143334 A1) discloses a universal, parent-to-dependent manufacturing recycling product code to capture and communicate essential information about products such as their components and materials and make recycle determination regarding the product.
- Borges et al. (US 9108797 B1) discloses identifying recyclable materials to a identification device using the detected oscillation frequency, and creating handling instructions for the pickup of the identified recyclable material.
-Michael David Shrout (US 20210170451 A1) discloses encoding the recyclability of items with identification markers and based upon comparing data automatically classify a material type and store it in the database for future use.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICO LAUREN PADUA whose telephone number is (703)756-1978. The examiner can normally be reached Mon to Fri: 8:30 to 5:00pm.
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, Jessica Lemieux can be reached at (571) 270-3445. 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.
/NICO L PADUA/ /JESSICA LEMIEUX/ Junior Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3626 Supervisory Patent Examiner, AU 3626