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 .
This is a Final Office Action on the merits. Claims 1-20 are currently pending and are addressed below.
Response to Amendment
1. The amendment filed 05/12/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-20 remain pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
2. Regarding the rejection made under 35 USC 103, the Applicant’s amendments and arguments have been fully considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the combination of references and/or rationale being used in the current rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
4. Claims 1, 4, 6-8, 11, and 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gentry et al. (US 20230011695, hereinafter Gentry) in view of Boivin (US 20030165374, hereinafter Boivin) and in further view of Mere (US 20190317498, hereinafter Mere).
Regarding claim 1, Gentry teaches a refuse vehicle (see at least Fig. 1), comprising:
a body defining a refuse compartment (see at least Fig. 1 and [0077]: “Body 106 defines a hopper 112 and a storage compartment 114.”);
a hopper including a partition that divides the hopper into a first area and a second area that feeds the refuse compartment (see at least Figs. 1-2, 19, and [0077]: “A wall (or partition, etc.) separates hopper 112 from storage compartment 114. A container collection arm 116 is secured behind cab 104 to the hopper 112.”; [0089]: “Referring again to FIG. 2, drive system 130 can be operated to rotate auger screw 131 to advance refuse into storage compartment 114.”);
a robotic arm implement (see at least Fig. 19 and [0117]: “Referring to FIG. 19, vehicle 340 includes robotic system 342 including robotic arm 344 and control unit 346.”);
a plurality of cameras positioned at the hopper (see at least Figs. 3, 9, and [0081]: “Contamination detection system 108 includes refuse support panel 124, refuse support panel actuator system 126, and sensor 128…The control system can use the information from sensor 128 and/or other sensors to control refuse support panel actuator system 126. In some implementations, sensor 128 is an image sensor. For illustrative purposes, only one of sensors 128 is shown in FIG. 2. A contamination detection system may, however, include any number of sensors. Each of the various sensors can provide image data and/or other sensor data to be used in contamination detection, refuse processing, or other vehicle operations.”); and
processing circuitry (see at least [0133]: “In some implementations, the analysis of the operational sensor data 1110, contaminant sensor data 1111, and/or packer sensor data 1113 is performed at least partly by the onboard computing device 1112, e.g., by processes that execute on the processor(s) 1114.”) configured to:
obtain image data of the hopper from the plurality of cameras (see at least Figs. 3, 9, and [0081]: “The control system can use the information from sensor 128 and/or other sensors to control refuse support panel actuator system 126. In some implementations, sensor 128 is an image sensor. For illustrative purposes, only one of sensors 128 is shown in FIG. 2. A contamination detection system may, however, include any number of sensors. Each of the various sensors can provide image data and/or other sensor data to be used in contamination detection, refuse processing, or other vehicle operations.”);
detect an object to be separated from other refuse in the hopper based on the image data (see at least [0058]: “In some implementations, an RCV includes a refuse support panel on which refuse can be placed for gathering image and/or sensor data for identifying material types and/or contamination.”; [0117]: “Control unit 346 may use image or sensor data captured by sensor 328 or other devices to control robotic arm 344. Robotic arm 344 may be used to remove selected items from refuse support panel 324. In the example shown in FIG. 19, items picked from refuse support panel 324 may be placed on a platform 348. In other implementations, items or material removed from a refuse support panel can be placed in a container, packed, crushed, recycled, or ejected from the vehicle.”); and
operate the robotic arm implement to reach into the first area and move the object out of the first area and into the second area of the hopper separate from refuse in the first area (see at least Fig. 19 and [0117]: “Referring to FIG. 19, vehicle 340 includes robotic system 342 including robotic arm 344 and control unit 346. Control unit 346 is coupled to robotic arm 344. Control unit 346 may use image or sensor data captured by sensor 328 or other devices to control robotic arm 344. Robotic arm 344 may be used to remove selected items from refuse support panel 324. In the example shown in FIG. 19, items picked from refuse support panel 324 may be placed on a platform 348. In other implementations, items or material removed from a refuse support panel can be placed in a container, packed, crushed, recycled, or ejected from the vehicle. In some implementations, items can be treated. Examples of treatments include heat, light, radiation, disinfectants, chemicals, or forced air.”).
Gentry fails to explicitly teach a first refuse compartment and a second refuse compartment and a hopper including a partition that divides the hopper into a first volume that feeds the first refuse compartment and a second volume that feeds the second refuse compartment.
However, Boivin teaches an apparatus and system for a refuse collection vehicle that comprises a first refuse compartment and a second refuse compartment (see at least Fig. 1 and [0025]: “In FIG. 1 the refuse collection bin 1 of a vehicle is provided with two internal compartments 2, 3 having different storage capacities.”) and a hopper including a partition that divides the hopper into a first volume that feeds the first refuse compartment and a second volume that feeds the second refuse compartment (see at least Figs. 2-6 and [0025]: “These receiving volumes 7a, 7b are traversed by a powered compaction wall 8 that separately advances refuse from the respective receiving volumes 7a, 7b into the respective compartments 2,3.”; [0027]: “Alternately, these panel portions 9, 10 may be swung separately, diverting refuse into the respective receiving volumes 7a,7b, as shown in FIGS. 5 and 6. FIGS. 5 and 6 depict two configurations: one where panel portion 9 directs refuse to receiving volume 7b (FIG. 5); and one where panel portion 9 directs refuse to receiving volume 7a (FIG. 6). Panel portion 10 feeds the alternate receiving volume in both cases.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gentry to incorporate the teachings of Boivin and provide a first refuse compartment and a second refuse compartment and a hopper including a partition that divides the hopper into a first volume that feeds the first refuse compartment and a second volume that feeds the second refuse compartment, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to store and keep different types of refuse in separate compartments.
The combination of Gentry and Boivin fails to explicitly teach operating the robotic arm to reach into the first volume and move the object out of the first volume and into the second volume for storage in the second volume separate from the first volume.
However, Mere teaches a method and system for an autonomous vehicle with a trailer to carry and deliver items from one location to another that operates a robotic arm implement to reach into a first volume and move an object out of the first volume and into a second volume for storage in the second volume separate from the first volume (see at least Figs. 4, 9, and [0045]: “For example, as shown in FIG. 9, the autonomous vehicle may include a robotic manipulator 250 coupled to the housing 202. The robotic manipulator 250 is configured to grasp objects located within the storage space 216 and place them in the first or second compartments 44, 46 of the autonomous vehicle 10 and vice versa.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gentry and Boivin to incorporate the teachings of Mere and provide a means to operates a robotic arm implement to reach into a first volume and move an object out of the first volume and into a second volume for storage in the second volume separate from the first volume, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to grasp and move objects between various compartments in the vehicle [0045].
Regarding claim 4, modified Gentry teaches the limitations of claim 1. Gentry further teaches wherein the object comprises an object having a disposal requirement that is different than the other refuse (see at least Fig. 19 and [0117]: “Referring to FIG. 19, vehicle 340 includes robotic system 342 including robotic arm 344 and control unit 346. Control unit 346 is coupled to robotic arm 344. Control unit 346 may use image or sensor data captured by sensor 328 or other devices to control robotic arm 344. Robotic arm 344 may be used to remove selected items from refuse support panel 324. In the example shown in FIG. 19, items picked from refuse support panel 324 may be placed on a platform 348. In other implementations, items or material removed from a refuse support panel can be placed in a container, packed, crushed, recycled, or ejected from the vehicle. In some implementations, items can be treated. Examples of treatments include heat, light, radiation, disinfectants, chemicals, or forced air.”).
Regarding claim 6, modified Gentry teaches the limitations of claim 1. Gentry further teaches wherein the object is a first object that the second area of the hopper is configured to dispose of (see at least Fig. 19 and [0117]: “Robotic arm 344 may be used to remove selected items from refuse support panel 324. In the example shown in FIG. 19, items picked from refuse support panel 324 may be placed on a platform 348.”), wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to:
detect a second object to be rejected from the other refuse in the hopper based on the image data (see at least Fig. 19 and [0117]: “Robotic arm 344 may be used to remove selected items from refuse support panel 324. In the example shown in FIG. 19, items picked from refuse support panel 324 may be placed on a platform 348.”); and
operate the robotic arm implement to move the second object from the hopper to a ground surface (see at least Fig. 19 and [0117]: “Robotic arm 344 may be used to remove selected items from refuse support panel 324. In the example shown in FIG. 19, items picked from refuse support panel 324 may be placed on a platform 348. In other implementations, items or material removed from a refuse support panel can be placed in a container, packed, crushed, recycled, or ejected from the vehicle.”).
Gentry fails to explicitly teach that the second area of the hopper is a second volume of the hopper.
However, Boivin teaches an apparatus and system for a refuse collection vehicle that comprises a second volume of a hopper (see at least Figs. 2-6 and [0025]: “These receiving volumes 7a, 7b are traversed by a powered compaction wall 8 that separately advances refuse from the respective receiving volumes 7a, 7b into the respective compartments 2,3.”; [0027]: “Alternately, these panel portions 9, 10 may be swung separately, diverting refuse into the respective receiving volumes 7a,7b, as shown in FIGS. 5 and 6. FIGS. 5 and 6 depict two configurations: one where panel portion 9 directs refuse to receiving volume 7b (FIG. 5); and one where panel portion 9 directs refuse to receiving volume 7a (FIG. 6). Panel portion 10 feeds the alternate receiving volume in both cases.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gentry to incorporate the teachings of Boivin and provide a second volume of a hopper, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to receive and keep different types of refuse in separate compartments.
Regarding claim 7, modified Gentry teaches the limitations of claim 6. Gentry further teaches wherein the second object is a type of object that is not supported for disposal by the refuse vehicle (see at least [0067]: “Identifying contaminants (unexpected or undesirable materials in a refuse stream) is important to the recycling industry because most recyclables today are collected via single-stream recycling…Contamination can refer to the presence of non-recyclable material in a stream that is expected to be recyclable, the presence of a recyclable material in a stream that is expected to be non-recyclable, and/or in general the presence of an unsuitable, unexpected, and/or undesirable material in a refuse stream.”; [0117]: “Robotic arm 344 may be used to remove selected items from refuse support panel 324. In the example shown in FIG. 19, items picked from refuse support panel 324 may be placed on a platform 348. In other implementations, items or material removed from a refuse support panel can be placed in a container, packed, crushed, recycled, or ejected from the vehicle.”).
Regarding claim 8, Gentry teaches a control system for a refuse vehicle (see at least Figs. 1 and 22), the control system comprising:
a robotic arm implement (see at least Fig. 19 and [0117]: “Referring to FIG. 19, vehicle 340 includes robotic system 342 including robotic arm 344 and control unit 346.”);
a plurality of cameras positioned at a hopper of the refuse vehicle (see at least Figs. 3, 9, and [0081]: “Contamination detection system 108 includes refuse support panel 124, refuse support panel actuator system 126, and sensor 128…The control system can use the information from sensor 128 and/or other sensors to control refuse support panel actuator system 126. In some implementations, sensor 128 is an image sensor. For illustrative purposes, only one of sensors 128 is shown in FIG. 2. A contamination detection system may, however, include any number of sensors. Each of the various sensors can provide image data and/or other sensor data to be used in contamination detection, refuse processing, or other vehicle operations.”); and
processing circuitry (see at least [0133]: “In some implementations, the analysis of the operational sensor data 1110, contaminant sensor data 1111, and/or packer sensor data 1113 is performed at least partly by the onboard computing device 1112, e.g., by processes that execute on the processor(s) 1114.”) configured to:
obtain image data of the hopper from the plurality of cameras (see at least Figs. 3, 9, and [0081]: “The control system can use the information from sensor 128 and/or other sensors to control refuse support panel actuator system 126. In some implementations, sensor 128 is an image sensor. For illustrative purposes, only one of sensors 128 is shown in FIG. 2. A contamination detection system may, however, include any number of sensors. Each of the various sensors can provide image data and/or other sensor data to be used in contamination detection, refuse processing, or other vehicle operations.”);
detect an object to be separated from other refuse in the hopper based on the image data (see at least [0058]: “In some implementations, an RCV includes a refuse support panel on which refuse can be placed for gathering image and/or sensor data for identifying material types and/or contamination.”; [0117]: “Control unit 346 may use image or sensor data captured by sensor 328 or other devices to control robotic arm 344. Robotic arm 344 may be used to remove selected items from refuse support panel 324. In the example shown in FIG. 19, items picked from refuse support panel 324 may be placed on a platform 348. In other implementations, items or material removed from a refuse support panel can be placed in a container, packed, crushed, recycled, or ejected from the vehicle.”); and
operate the robotic arm implement to move the object from a first area of the hopper to a second area of the hopper in the refuse compartment separate from the other refuse (see at least Fig. 19 and [0117]: “Referring to FIG. 19, vehicle 340 includes robotic system 342 including robotic arm 344 and control unit 346. Control unit 346 is coupled to robotic arm 344. Control unit 346 may use image or sensor data captured by sensor 328 or other devices to control robotic arm 344. Robotic arm 344 may be used to remove selected items from refuse support panel 324. In the example shown in FIG. 19, items picked from refuse support panel 324 may be placed on a platform 348. In other implementations, items or material removed from a refuse support panel can be placed in a container, packed, crushed, recycled, or ejected from the vehicle. In some implementations, items can be treated. Examples of treatments include heat, light, radiation, disinfectants, chemicals, or forced air.”).
Gentry fails to explicitly teach a first volume on a first side of a partition of a hopper and a second volume on a second side of the partition of the hopper and a pair of refuse compartments separate from the other refuse.
However, Boivin teaches an apparatus and system for a refuse collection vehicle that comprises a first volume on a first side of a partition of a hopper and a second volume on a second side of the partition of the hopper and a pair of refuse compartments separate from other refuse (see at least Figs. 1-6 and [0025]: “In FIG. 1 the refuse collection bin 1 of a vehicle is provided with two internal compartments 2, 3 having different storage capacities.”; [0025]: “These receiving volumes 7a, 7b are traversed by a powered compaction wall 8 that separately advances refuse from the respective receiving volumes 7a, 7b into the respective compartments 2,3.”; [0027]: “Alternately, these panel portions 9, 10 may be swung separately, diverting refuse into the respective receiving volumes 7a,7b, as shown in FIGS. 5 and 6. FIGS. 5 and 6 depict two configurations: one where panel portion 9 directs refuse to receiving volume 7b (FIG. 5); and one where panel portion 9 directs refuse to receiving volume 7a (FIG. 6). Panel portion 10 feeds the alternate receiving volume in both cases.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gentry to incorporate the teachings of Boivin and provide a first volume on a first side of a partition of a hopper and a second volume on a second side of the partition of the hopper and a pair of refuse compartments separate from other refuse, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to store and keep different types of refuse in separate compartments.
The combination of Gentry and Boivin fails to explicitly teach operating the robotic arm implement to move the object from a first volume on a first side of a partition to a second volume on a second side of the partition for storage (see at least Figs. 4, 9, and [0045]: “For example, as shown in FIG. 9, the autonomous vehicle may include a robotic manipulator 250 coupled to the housing 202. The robotic manipulator 250 is configured to grasp objects located within the storage space 216 and place them in the first or second compartments 44, 46 of the autonomous vehicle 10 and vice versa.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gentry and Boivin to incorporate the teachings of Mere and provide a means to operate the robotic arm implement to move the object from a first volume on a first side of a partition to a second volume on a second side of the partition for storage, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to grasp and move objects between various compartments in the vehicle [0045].
Regarding claim 11, modified Gentry teaches the limitations of claim 8. Gentry further teaches wherein the object comprises an object having a disposal requirement that is different than the other refuse (see at least Fig. 19 and [0117]: “Referring to FIG. 19, vehicle 340 includes robotic system 342 including robotic arm 344 and control unit 346. Control unit 346 is coupled to robotic arm 344. Control unit 346 may use image or sensor data captured by sensor 328 or other devices to control robotic arm 344. Robotic arm 344 may be used to remove selected items from refuse support panel 324. In the example shown in FIG. 19, items picked from refuse support panel 324 may be placed on a platform 348. In other implementations, items or material removed from a refuse support panel can be placed in a container, packed, crushed, recycled, or ejected from the vehicle. In some implementations, items can be treated. Examples of treatments include heat, light, radiation, disinfectants, chemicals, or forced air.”).
Regarding claim 13, modified Gentry teaches the limitations of claim 8. Gentry further teaches wherein the object is a first object that the second area of the hopper is configured to dispose of (see at least Fig. 19 and [0117]: “Robotic arm 344 may be used to remove selected items from refuse support panel 324. In the example shown in FIG. 19, items picked from refuse support panel 324 may be placed on a platform 348.”), wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to:
detect a second object to be rejected from the other refuse in the hopper based on the image data (see at least Fig. 19 and [0117]: “Robotic arm 344 may be used to remove selected items from refuse support panel 324. In the example shown in FIG. 19, items picked from refuse support panel 324 may be placed on a platform 348.”); and
operate the robotic arm implement to move the second object from the hopper to a ground surface (see at least Fig. 19 and [0117]: “Robotic arm 344 may be used to remove selected items from refuse support panel 324. In the example shown in FIG. 19, items picked from refuse support panel 324 may be placed on a platform 348. In other implementations, items or material removed from a refuse support panel can be placed in a container, packed, crushed, recycled, or ejected from the vehicle.”).
Gentry fails to explicitly teach that the second area of the hopper is a second volume of the hopper.
However, Boivin teaches an apparatus and system for a refuse collection vehicle that comprises a second volume of a hopper (see at least Figs. 2-6 and [0025]: “These receiving volumes 7a, 7b are traversed by a powered compaction wall 8 that separately advances refuse from the respective receiving volumes 7a, 7b into the respective compartments 2,3.”; [0027]: “Alternately, these panel portions 9, 10 may be swung separately, diverting refuse into the respective receiving volumes 7a,7b, as shown in FIGS. 5 and 6. FIGS. 5 and 6 depict two configurations: one where panel portion 9 directs refuse to receiving volume 7b (FIG. 5); and one where panel portion 9 directs refuse to receiving volume 7a (FIG. 6). Panel portion 10 feeds the alternate receiving volume in both cases.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gentry to incorporate the teachings of Boivin and provide a second volume of a hopper, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to receive and keep different types of refuse in separate compartments.
Regarding claim 14, modified Gentry teaches the limitations of claim 13. Gentry further teaches wherein the second object is a type of object that is not supported for disposal by the refuse vehicle (see at least [0067]: “Identifying contaminants (unexpected or undesirable materials in a refuse stream) is important to the recycling industry because most recyclables today are collected via single-stream recycling…Contamination can refer to the presence of non-recyclable material in a stream that is expected to be recyclable, the presence of a recyclable material in a stream that is expected to be non-recyclable, and/or in general the presence of an unsuitable, unexpected, and/or undesirable material in a refuse stream.”; [0117]: “Robotic arm 344 may be used to remove selected items from refuse support panel 324. In the example shown in FIG. 19, items picked from refuse support panel 324 may be placed on a platform 348. In other implementations, items or material removed from a refuse support panel can be placed in a container, packed, crushed, recycled, or ejected from the vehicle.”).
5. Claims 2, 3, 5, 9-10, and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gentry et al. (US 20230011695, hereinafter Gentry) and Boivin (US 20030165374, hereinafter Boivin) and Mere (US 20190317498, hereinafter Mere) in view of Kurani et al. (US 20210188541, hereinafter Kurani).
Regarding claim 2, modified Gentry teaches the limitations of claim 1. Gentry further teaches wherein the processing circuitry is configured to obtain at least part of the image data from a camera positioned within a refuse container (see at least Figs. 3, 9, and [0081]: “The control system can use the information from sensor 128 and/or other sensors to control refuse support panel actuator system 126. In some implementations, sensor 128 is an image sensor. For illustrative purposes, only one of sensors 128 is shown in FIG. 2. A contamination detection system may, however, include any number of sensors. Each of the various sensors can provide image data and/or other sensor data to be used in contamination detection, refuse processing, or other vehicle operations.”).
Gentry fails to explicitly teach obtaining at least part of the image data from a camera positioned within a customer’s refuse container.
However, Kurani teaches a system and method for waste management that obtains at least part of an image data from a camera positioned within a customer’s refuse container (see at least Figs. 6-7 and [0132]: “The intended use of the camera is to take photos and videos inside or near the waste bin which can be used to refine the waste bin waste fill level data and provide type of waste information. The camera can continually learn new waste objects like paper, containers, food scraps, cardboard boxes, litter, hazardous waste, and so on, even from different angles and in various ranges.”; [0254]: “The smart waste bin sensor device 300 sensors hardware comprises an RFID tag sensor 302, a location sensor 304, a fill level sensor 306, a temperature, humidity, and pressure sensor 308, an air quality sensor 310, a smoke sensor 312, a gas sensor 314, an ambient light sensor 316, a motion sensor 318, a waste and litter sensor 320 comprising a camera and flash, a pathogen biosensor 322, and a single board microcomputer 800 comprising an accelerometer sensor 808.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gentry to incorporate the teachings of Kurani and provide means to obtain at least part of the image data from a camera positioned within a customer’s refuse container, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to recognize objects inside the customer’s container when manipulating and sorting the objects.
Regarding claim 3, modified Gentry teaches the limitations of claim 1. Gentry further teaches wherein the processing circuitry is configured to communicate with a camera coupled to a refuse container and configured to obtain image data of an interior of the refuse container, the processing circuitry configured to obtain the image data of the interior of the refuse container and detect an object to be separate from the other refuse (see at least Figs. 3, 9, and [0081]: “The control system can use the information from sensor 128 and/or other sensors to control refuse support panel actuator system 126. In some implementations, sensor 128 is an image sensor. For illustrative purposes, only one of sensors 128 is shown in FIG. 2. A contamination detection system may, however, include any number of sensors. Each of the various sensors can provide image data and/or other sensor data to be used in contamination detection, refuse processing, or other vehicle operations.”; [0117]: “Control unit 346 may use image or sensor data captured by sensor 328 or other devices to control robotic arm 344. Robotic arm 344 may be used to remove selected items from refuse support panel 324. In the example shown in FIG. 19, items picked from refuse support panel 324 may be placed on a platform 348. In other implementations, items or material removed from a refuse support panel can be placed in a container, packed, crushed, recycled, or ejected from the vehicle.”).
Gentry fails to explicitly teach communicating with a camera coupled to a customer’s refuse container and configured to obtain image data of an interior of the customer’s refuse container, the processing circuitry configured to obtain the image data of the interior of the customer’s refuse container and detect an object to be separate from the other refuse.
However, Kurani teaches a system and method for waste management that communicates with a camera coupled to a customer’s refuse container, obtain image data of an interior of the customer’s refuse container, and detect an object to be separate from the other refuse (see at least Figs. 1-2, 6-7, 49, [0132], [0223], [0254], [0513-0522]: image data from cameras located inside a customer’s refuse container are acquired and the object data is analyzed and evaluated to create an optimal waste collection vehicle route.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gentry to incorporate the teachings of Kurani and provide means to communicate with a camera coupled to a customer’s refuse container, obtain image data of an interior of the customer’s refuse container, and detect an object to be separate from the other refuse, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to recognize objects inside the customer’s container when manipulating and sorting the objects.
Regarding claim 5, modified Gentry teaches the limitations of claim 4. Gentry further teaches wherein the object comprises materials (see at least [0059]: “The image(s) can be analyzed to detect different types of materials that may be present in the refuse, such as the presence of recyclable materials in refuse that is otherwise expected to be non-recyclable. In some examples, the identification of material(s) in collected refuse can trigger the sending of an alert notification to one or more individuals, and/or other actions.”).
Gentry fails to explicitly teach the object comprises a tire, a container of liquid, an appliance, or garden materials.
However, Kurani teaches a system and method for waste management that recognized object comprising a tire, a container of liquid, an appliance, or garden materials (see at least Figs. 1-2, 6-7, and [0465]: “The waste type classification inside the waste bin 600 comprises: a food waste, a garbage, a plastic container, a paper, a yard waste, a hazardous waste, and a biohazardous waste. The litter type classification surrounding the waste bin comprises: an aluminum can, a paper cup, a fast food wrapper, a cardboard box, a plastic bottle, a cigarette butt, a tire, an electrical appliance, electronics, a battery, and a biohazardous material. The waste and litter image processing module can be programmed to recognize any waste objects.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gentry to incorporate the teachings of Kurani and provide means to recognize object comprising a tire, a container of liquid, an appliance, or garden materials, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to detect specific objects to be sorted by the refuse vehicle.
Regarding claim 9, modified Gentry teaches the limitations of claim 8. Gentry further teaches wherein the processing circuitry is configured to obtain at least part of the image data from a camera positioned within a refuse container (see at least Figs. 3, 9, and [0081]: “The control system can use the information from sensor 128 and/or other sensors to control refuse support panel actuator system 126. In some implementations, sensor 128 is an image sensor. For illustrative purposes, only one of sensors 128 is shown in FIG. 2. A contamination detection system may, however, include any number of sensors. Each of the various sensors can provide image data and/or other sensor data to be used in contamination detection, refuse processing, or other vehicle operations.”).
Gentry fails to explicitly teach obtaining at least part of the image data from a camera positioned within a customer’s refuse container.
However, Kurani teaches a system and method for waste management that obtains at least part of an image data from a camera positioned within a customer’s refuse container (see at least Figs. 6-7 and [0132]: “The intended use of the camera is to take photos and videos inside or near the waste bin which can be used to refine the waste bin waste fill level data and provide type of waste information. The camera can continually learn new waste objects like paper, containers, food scraps, cardboard boxes, litter, hazardous waste, and so on, even from different angles and in various ranges.”; [0254]: “The smart waste bin sensor device 300 sensors hardware comprises an RFID tag sensor 302, a location sensor 304, a fill level sensor 306, a temperature, humidity, and pressure sensor 308, an air quality sensor 310, a smoke sensor 312, a gas sensor 314, an ambient light sensor 316, a motion sensor 318, a waste and litter sensor 320 comprising a camera and flash, a pathogen biosensor 322, and a single board microcomputer 800 comprising an accelerometer sensor 808.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gentry to incorporate the teachings of Kurani and provide means to obtain at least part of the image data from a camera positioned within a customer’s refuse container, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to recognize objects inside the customer’s container when manipulating and sorting the objects.
Regarding claim 10, modified Gentry teaches the limitations of claim 8. Gentry further teaches wherein the processing circuitry is configured to communicate with a camera coupled to a refuse container and configured to obtain image data of an interior of the refuse container, the processing circuitry configured to obtain the image data of the interior of the refuse container and detect an object to be separate from the other refuse (see at least Figs. 3, 9, and [0081]: “The control system can use the information from sensor 128 and/or other sensors to control refuse support panel actuator system 126. In some implementations, sensor 128 is an image sensor. For illustrative purposes, only one of sensors 128 is shown in FIG. 2. A contamination detection system may, however, include any number of sensors. Each of the various sensors can provide image data and/or other sensor data to be used in contamination detection, refuse processing, or other vehicle operations.”; [0117]: “Control unit 346 may use image or sensor data captured by sensor 328 or other devices to control robotic arm 344. Robotic arm 344 may be used to remove selected items from refuse support panel 324. In the example shown in FIG. 19, items picked from refuse support panel 324 may be placed on a platform 348. In other implementations, items or material removed from a refuse support panel can be placed in a container, packed, crushed, recycled, or ejected from the vehicle.”).
Gentry fails to explicitly teach communicating with a camera coupled to a customer’s refuse container and configured to obtain image data of an interior of the customer’s refuse container, the processing circuitry configured to obtain the image data of the interior of the customer’s refuse container and detect an object to be separate from the other refuse.
However, Kurani teaches a system and method for waste management that communicates with a camera coupled to a customer’s refuse container, obtain image data of an interior of the customer’s refuse container, and detect an object to be separate from the other refuse (see at least Figs. 1-2, 6-7, 49, [0132], [0223], [0254], [0513-0522]: image data from cameras located inside a customer’s refuse container are acquired and the object data is analyzed and evaluated to create an optimal waste collection vehicle route.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gentry to incorporate the teachings of Kurani and provide means to communicate with a camera coupled to a customer’s refuse container, obtain image data of an interior of the customer’s refuse container, and detect an object to be separate from the other refuse, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to recognize objects inside the customer’s container when manipulating and sorting the objects.
Regarding claim 12, modified Gentry teaches the limitations of claim 11. Gentry further teaches wherein the object comprises materials (see at least [0059]: “The image(s) can be analyzed to detect different types of materials that may be present in the refuse, such as the presence of recyclable materials in refuse that is otherwise expected to be non-recyclable. In some examples, the identification of material(s) in collected refuse can trigger the sending of an alert notification to one or more individuals, and/or other actions.”).
Gentry fails to explicitly teach the object comprises a tire, a container of liquid, an appliance, or garden materials.
However, Kurani teaches a system and method for waste management that recognized object comprising a tire, a container of liquid, an appliance, or garden materials (see at least Figs. 1-2, 6-7, and [0465]: “The waste type classification inside the waste bin 600 comprises: a food waste, a garbage, a plastic container, a paper, a yard waste, a hazardous waste, and a biohazardous waste. The litter type classification surrounding the waste bin comprises: an aluminum can, a paper cup, a fast food wrapper, a cardboard box, a plastic bottle, a cigarette butt, a tire, an electrical appliance, electronics, a battery, and a biohazardous material. The waste and litter image processing module can be programmed to recognize any waste objects.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gentry to incorporate the teachings of Kurani and provide means to recognize object comprising a tire, a container of liquid, an appliance, or garden materials, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to detect specific objects to be sorted by the refuse vehicle.
6. Claims 15-16, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gentry et al. (US 20230011695, hereinafter Gentry) in view of Boivin (US 20030165374, hereinafter Boivin) and in further view of Romano et al. (US 20200034785, hereinafter Romano).
Regarding claim 15, Gentry teaches a refuse vehicle (see at least Fig. 1) comprising:
a body defining a refuse compartment (see at least Fig. 1 and [0077]: “Body 106 defines a hopper 112 and a storage compartment 114.”);
a hopper configured to receive refuse and direct the refuse into the refuse compartment (see at least Fig. 1 and [0077]: “A wall (or partition, etc.) separates hopper 112 from storage compartment 114. A container collection arm 116 is secured behind cab 104 to the hopper 112.”);
a plurality of cameras positioned at the hopper (see at least Figs. 3, 9, and [0081]: “Contamination detection system 108 includes refuse support panel 124, refuse support panel actuator system 126, and sensor 128…The control system can use the information from sensor 128 and/or other sensors to control refuse support panel actuator system 126. In some implementations, sensor 128 is an image sensor. For illustrative purposes, only one of sensors 128 is shown in FIG. 2. A contamination detection system may, however, include any number of sensors. Each of the various sensors can provide image data and/or other sensor data to be used in contamination detection, refuse processing, or other vehicle operations.”); and
processing circuitry (see at least [0133]: “In some implementations, the analysis of the operational sensor data 1110, contaminant sensor data 1111, and/or packer sensor data 1113 is performed at least partly by the onboard computing device 1112, e.g., by processes that execute on the processor(s) 1114.”) configured to:
obtain image data of the hopper from the plurality of cameras (see at least Figs. 3, 9, and [0081]: “The control system can use the information from sensor 128 and/or other sensors to control refuse support panel actuator system 126. In some implementations, sensor 128 is an image sensor. For illustrative purposes, only one of sensors 128 is shown in FIG. 2. A contamination detection system may, however, include any number of sensors. Each of the various sensors can provide image data and/or other sensor data to be used in contamination detection, refuse processing, or other vehicle operations.”);
detect an object to be separated from other refuse in the hopper based on the image data (see at least [0058]: “In some implementations, an RCV includes a refuse support panel on which refuse can be placed for gathering image and/or sensor data for identifying material types and/or contamination.”; [0117]: “Control unit 346 may use image or sensor data captured by sensor 328 or other devices to control robotic arm 344. Robotic arm 344 may be used to remove selected items from refuse support panel 324. In the example shown in FIG. 19, items picked from refuse support panel 324 may be placed on a platform 348. In other implementations, items or material removed from a refuse support panel can be placed in a container, packed, crushed, recycled, or ejected from the vehicle.”); and
in response to detecting the object in the hopper, operate the hopper to direct the refuse in the hopper including the object into a refuse compartment separate from other refuse (see at least Figs. 2, 19, [0089]: “Referring again to FIG. 2, drive system 130 can be operated to rotate auger screw 131 to advance refuse into storage compartment 114. After material is pushed into storage compartment 114 by auger screw 131, the refuse can be further compacted by the ejector 136.”; and [0117]: “Referring to FIG. 19, vehicle 340 includes robotic system 342 including robotic arm 344 and control unit 346. Control unit 346 is coupled to robotic arm 344. Control unit 346 may use image or sensor data captured by sensor 328 or other devices to control robotic arm 344. Robotic arm 344 may be used to remove selected items from refuse support panel 324. In the example shown in FIG. 19, items picked from refuse support panel 324 may be placed on a platform 348. In other implementations, items or material removed from a refuse support panel can be placed in a container, packed, crushed, recycled, or ejected from the vehicle. In some implementations, items can be treated. Examples of treatments include heat, light, radiation, disinfectants, chemicals, or forced air.”; [0130]: “Information from the sensors can be used to control motion of the auger screw or the ejector. For example, speed or acceleration of an ejector may be controlled based on loads encountered during packing, ejecting, or retracting.”).
Gentry fails to explicitly teach a pair of refuse compartments to store objects.
However, Boivin teaches an apparatus and system for a refuse collection vehicle that comprises a pair of refuse compartments to store objects (see at least Fig. 1 and [0025]: “In FIG. 1 the refuse collection bin 1 of a vehicle is provided with two internal compartments 2, 3 having different storage capacities.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gentry to incorporate the teachings of Boivin and provide a pair of refuse compartments to store objects, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to store and keep different types of refuse in separate compartments.
The combination of Gentry and Boivin fails to explicitly teach operating the hopper to direct all the refuse in the hopper to another area.
However, Romano teaches a method and system for refuse contamination analysis that in response to detecting an object in the hopper, operates a hopper to direct all refuse in the hopper to another area (see at least Figs. 7A, 7B and [0099]: “FIGS. 7A and 7B depict example schematics of an RCV configured for identifying contamination and/or other issue(s), according to implementations of the present disclosure. In these examples, the RCV 102 is equipped with a false floor 702 at or near the bottom of the hopper 402. As shown in FIG. 7A, when the floor 702 is substantially horizontal, it forms a surface on which refuse from an emptied container can land and rest temporarily while image(s) and/or other contaminant sensor data are collected of the refuse by proximal camera(s) and/or other contaminant sensor(s). When the false floor 702 is elevated, as shown in FIG. 7B, the refuse can be moved off of the false floor 702, e.g., into another area in the hopper 402.” Romano teaches a false floor 702 that is elevated to direct all the refuse in the hopper.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gentry and Boivin to incorporate the teachings of Romano and provide a means to operate a hopper to direct all the refuse in the hopper, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order move all the materials and clear the area in the hopper to make room for new materials.
Regarding claim 16, modified Gentry teaches the limitations of claim 15. Gentry further teaches wherein the processing circuitry is configured to operate a hopper actuator to operate the hopper, the hopper actuator configured to drive a first arm or a second arm of the hopper to direct refuse and the object into the refuse compartment (see at least Figs. 2, 19, [0089]: “Referring again to FIG. 2, drive system 130 can be operated to rotate auger screw 131 to advance refuse into storage compartment 114. After material is pushed into storage compartment 114 by auger screw 131, the refuse can be further compacted by the ejector 136.”; and [0117]: “Referring to FIG. 19, vehicle 340 includes robotic system 342 including robotic arm 344 and control unit 346. Control unit 346 is coupled to robotic arm 344. Control unit 346 may use image or sensor data captured by sensor 328 or other devices to control robotic arm 344. Robotic arm 344 may be used to remove selected items from refuse support panel 324. In the example shown in FIG. 19, items picked from refuse support panel 324 may be placed on a platform 348. In other implementations, items or material removed from a refuse support panel can be placed in a container, packed, crushed, recycled, or ejected from the vehicle. In some implementations, items can be treated. Examples of treatments include heat, light, radiation, disinfectants, chemicals, or forced air.”).
Gentry fails to explicitly teach a pair of refuse compartments to store objects.
However, Boivin teaches an apparatus and system for a refuse collection vehicle that comprises a pair of refuse compartments to store objects (see at least Fig. 1 and [0025]: “In FIG. 1 the refuse collection bin 1 of a vehicle is provided with two internal compartments 2, 3 having different storage capacities.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gentry to incorporate the teachings of Boivin and provide a pair of refuse compartments to store objects, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to store and keep different types of refuse in separate compartments.
Regarding claim 19, modified Gentry teaches the limitations of claim 15. Gentry further teaches wherein the object comprises an object having a disposal requirement that is different than the other refuse (see at least Fig. 19 and [0117]: “Referring to FIG. 19, vehicle 340 includes robotic system 342 including robotic arm 344 and control unit 346. Control unit 346 is coupled to robotic arm 344. Control unit 346 may use image or sensor data captured by sensor 328 or other devices to control robotic arm 344. Robotic arm 344 may be used to remove selected items from refuse support panel 324. In the example shown in FIG. 19, items picked from refuse support panel 324 may be placed on a platform 348. In other implementations, items or material removed from a refuse support panel can be placed in a container, packed, crushed, recycled, or ejected from the vehicle. In some implementations, items can be treated. Examples of treatments include heat, light, radiation, disinfectants, chemicals, or forced air.”).
7. Claims 17-18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gentry et al. (US 20230011695, hereinafter Gentry) and Boivin (US 20030165374, hereinafter Boivin) and Romano et al. (US 20200034785, hereinafter Romano) in view of Kurani et al. (US 20210188541, hereinafter Kurani).
Regarding claim 17, modified Gentry teaches the limitations of claim 15. Gentry further teaches wherein the processing circuitry is configured to obtain at least part of the image data from a camera positioned within a refuse container (see at least Figs. 3, 9, and [0081]: “The control system can use the information from sensor 128 and/or other sensors to control refuse support panel actuator system 126. In some implementations, sensor 128 is an image sensor. For illustrative purposes, only one of sensors 128 is shown in FIG. 2. A contamination detection system may, however, include any number of sensors. Each of the various sensors can provide image data and/or other sensor data to be used in contamination detection, refuse processing, or other vehicle operations.”).
Gentry fails to explicitly teach obtaining at least part of the image data from a camera positioned within a customer’s refuse container.
However, Kurani teaches a system and method for waste management that obtains at least part of an image data from a camera positioned within a customer’s refuse container (see at least Figs. 6-7 and [0132]: “The intended use of the camera is to take photos and videos inside or near the waste bin which can be used to refine the waste bin waste fill level data and provide type of waste information. The camera can continually learn new waste objects like paper, containers, food scraps, cardboard boxes, litter, hazardous waste, and so on, even from different angles and in various ranges.”; [0254]: “The smart waste bin sensor device 300 sensors hardware comprises an RFID tag sensor 302, a location sensor 304, a fill level sensor 306, a temperature, humidity, and pressure sensor 308, an air quality sensor 310, a smoke sensor 312, a gas sensor 314, an ambient light sensor 316, a motion sensor 318, a waste and litter sensor 320 comprising a camera and flash, a pathogen biosensor 322, and a single board microcomputer 800 comprising an accelerometer sensor 808.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gentry to incorporate the teachings of Kurani and provide means to obtain at least part of the image data from a camera positioned within a customer’s refuse container, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to recognize objects inside the customer’s container when manipulating and sorting the objects.
Regarding claim 18, modified Gentry teaches the limitations of claim 15. Gentry further teaches wherein the processing circuitry is configured to communicate with a camera coupled to a refuse container and configured to obtain image data of an interior of the refuse container, the processing circuitry configured to obtain the image data of the interior of the refuse container and detect an object to be separate from the other refuse (see at least Figs. 3, 9, and [0081]: “The control system can use the information from sensor 128 and/or other sensors to control refuse support panel actuator system 126. In some implementations, sensor 128 is an image sensor. For illustrative purposes, only one of sensors 128 is shown in FIG. 2. A contamination detection system may, however, include any number of sensors. Each of the various sensors can provide image data and/or other sensor data to be used in contamination detection, refuse processing, or other vehicle operations.”; [0117]: “Control unit 346 may use image or sensor data captured by sensor 328 or other devices to control robotic arm 344. Robotic arm 344 may be used to remove selected items from refuse support panel 324. In the example shown in FIG. 19, items picked from refuse support panel 324 may be placed on a platform 348. In other implementations, items or material removed from a refuse support panel can be placed in a container, packed, crushed, recycled, or ejected from the vehicle.”).
Gentry fails to explicitly teach communicating with a camera coupled to a customer’s refuse container and configured to obtain image data of an interior of the customer’s refuse container, the processing circuitry configured to obtain the image data of the interior of the customer’s refuse container and detect an object to be separate from the other refuse.
However, Kurani teaches a system and method for waste management that communicates with a camera coupled to a customer’s refuse container, obtain image data of an interior of the customer’s refuse container, and detect an object to be separate from the other refuse (see at least Figs. 1-2, 6-7, 49, [0132], [0223], [0254], [0513-0522]: image data from cameras located inside a customer’s refuse container are acquired and the object data is analyzed and evaluated to create an optimal waste collection vehicle route.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gentry to incorporate the teachings of Kurani and provide means to communicate with a camera coupled to a customer’s refuse container, obtain image data of an interior of the customer’s refuse container, and detect an object to be separate from the other refuse, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to recognize objects inside the customer’s container when manipulating and sorting the objects.
Regarding claim 20, modified Gentry teaches the limitations of claim 19. Gentry further teaches wherein the object comprises materials (see at least [0059]: “The image(s) can be analyzed to detect different types of materials that may be present in the refuse, such as the presence of recyclable materials in refuse that is otherwise expected to be non-recyclable. In some examples, the identification of material(s) in collected refuse can trigger the sending of an alert notification to one or more individuals, and/or other actions.”).
Gentry fails to explicitly teach the object comprises a tire, a container of liquid, an appliance, or garden materials.
However, Kurani teaches a system and method for waste management that recognized object comprising a tire, a container of liquid, an appliance, or garden materials (see at least Figs. 1-2, 6-7, and [0465]: “The waste type classification inside the waste bin 600 comprises: a food waste, a garbage, a plastic container, a paper, a yard waste, a hazardous waste, and a biohazardous waste. The litter type classification surrounding the waste bin comprises: an aluminum can, a paper cup, a fast food wrapper, a cardboard box, a plastic bottle, a cigarette butt, a tire, an electrical appliance, electronics, a battery, and a biohazardous material. The waste and litter image processing module can be programmed to recognize any waste objects.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gentry to incorporate the teachings of Kurani and provide means to recognize object comprising a tire, a container of liquid, an appliance, or garden materials, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to detect specific objects to be sorted by the refuse vehicle.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIEN MINH LE whose telephone number is (571)272-3903. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday (8:30am-5:30pm eastern time).
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, Khoi Tran can be reached on (571)272-6919. 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.
/T.M.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3656
/KHOI H TRAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3656
Prosecution Insights