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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claim 6 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12/30/2022.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “the weight bar comprising at least one threaded hole for receiving a threaded post, the threaded post configured to receive a replaceable anode” (see claim 1) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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 22, 24, and 26 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.
In regard to claim 22, the phrase “wherein one of the plurality of angled struts located on each side of the collapsible entrance frame” renders the claim vague and indefinite since the phrase is incorrectly claiming that there is one angled strut on each side of the collapsible frame entrance. Possibly the phrase could be rewritten as --wherein a respective one of the plurality of angled struts is located on each side of the collapsible entrance frame--.
In regard to claim 22, lines 2 and 5, the terms “the escape window” lacks positive antecedent basis since the term “one or more of…an escape window” was previously recited in claim 13.
In regard to claim 24, the phrase “wherein one of the plurality of angled struts located on each side of the collapsible entrance frame” renders the claim vague and indefinite since the phrase is incorrectly claiming that there is one angled strut on each side of the collapsible frame entrance. Possibly the phrase could be rewritten as --wherein a respective one of the plurality of angled struts is located on each side of the collapsible entrance frame--.
In regard to claim 24, lines 2 and 6, the terms “the escape window” lack positive antecedent basis since “at least one escape window” was previously recited in claim 14.
In regard to claim 26, the phrase “wherein one of the plurality of angled struts located on each side of the collapsible entrance frame” renders the claim vague and indefinite since the phrase is incorrectly claiming that there is one angled strut on each side of the collapsible entrance frame. Possibly the phrase could be rewritten as --wherein a respective one of the plurality of angled struts is located on each side of the collapsible entrance frame--.
In regard to claim 26, lines 3-4, the term “the escape window” lacks positive antecedent basis since “at least one escape window” was initially recited in claim 26.
Claims 19-21 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential structural cooperative relationships of elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the necessary structural connections. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted structural cooperative relationships are: the at least one escape ring located at the level of the floor frame is not being minimally recited as being structurally related or connected to any other part of the crustacean trap.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-5, 10, 11, 13, and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stearns 8,402,689 in view of AU 2012203103 to Hayes and Senf 2019/0343100.
In regard to claim 1, Stearns discloses a crustacean trap, comprising: a trap frame (102), comprising: a floor frame section (bottom of 102) defining a floor surface area (see Fig. 1), the floor frame section defining a perimeter frame structure (see Fig. 1); a weight bar attached to the floor frame section; a ceiling frame section (top of 102) defining a ceiling surface area (206; see Figs. 1-2), wherein said ceiling surface area is larger than said floor surface area (see Figs. 1-2); and a plurality of angled struts (vertically extending portions of 102) connecting the floor frame section to the ceiling frame section and defining a tapered side between the floor frame section and the ceiling frame section (see Figs. 1-2); a floor mesh (110 on bottom of 102) extending over the floor surface area; a side mesh (110 extending along sides of 102) extending over a first portion of the tapered side; an entrance mesh (mesh of 324, 356, or 414) extending inwardly from a second portion of the tapered side; an entrance frame (344) attached to the entrance mesh and forming an entrance (see Fig. 3C’) into the crustacean trap; a tensioning element (420) to pull the entrance frame inwardly; and a ceiling mesh (422) extending over the ceiling surface area, wherein the ceiling mesh is releasable to allow nested stacking of multiple crustacean traps (when rope 420 is loosened to thereby release tension in holding access port 104 closed/taut), and wherein the ceiling mesh is restorable for crustacean trap deployment (when rope 420 is looped around access port 104 and is cinched and passes through mesh covering upper surface 422), but does not disclose an elongated weight bar that spans across at least a portion of, and is attached to the perimeter frame structure of the floor frame section or either a threaded post affixed to the weight bar or the weight bar comprising at least one threaded hole for receiving a threaded post, the threaded post configured to receive a replaceable anode. Hayes discloses an elongated weight bar (30,112; 112 has a length) that spans across (see Figs. 7, 7A) at least a portion of, and is attached to the perimeter frame structure (perimeter of 100) of the floor frame section (100); and either a threaded post (113) affixed to the weight bar (at 115 via 114; see Fig. 7A) or the weight bar (112) comprising at least one threaded hole (114) for receiving a threaded post (113; see Fig. 7A), the threaded post configured to receive a replaceable anode (113 capable of receiving an anode thereon via the threads on 113; anode not being positively recited as part of the invention), wherein the threaded post and the threaded hole is used to secure the weight bar to the perimeter frame structure. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the perimeter frame structure of the floor frame section of Stearns such that an elongated weight bar spans at least a portion of, and is attached to the perimeter frame structure of the floor frame section and either a threaded post affixed to the weight bar or the weight bar comprising at least one threaded hole for receiving a threaded post, the threaded post configured to receive a replaceable anode in view of Hayes in order to allow the trap to properly sink to the bottom of the body of water and to be biased into an upright orientation for proper trapping of the intended targeted species and to provide a detachable connection between the elongated weight bar and the perimeter frame structure so that the user can easily detach the elongated weight bar from the perimeter frame structure for purposes in facilitating repair or replacement of the elongated weight bar. Stearns also does not disclose a plurality of entrance meshes or an entrance frame attached to each of the entrance meshes. Senf discloses a plurality of entrance meshes (301) and an entrance frame (frame of 301 with 107; also see Fig. 3) attached to each of the entrance meshes (stainless steel netting 401 on tunnels 301). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the entrance mesh and entrance frame of Stearns such that there are a plurality of entrance meshes and an entrance frame attached to each of the entrance meshes in order to provide a plurality of entry points into the trap so as to increase the likelihood of trapping individuals of the intended targeted species.
In regard to claim 2, Stearns discloses wherein the ceiling mesh comprises a web of flexible cord and a drawstring, wherein the drawstring is releasable in order to release the ceiling mesh (when rope 420 is loosened to thereby release tension in holding access port 104 closed/taut), and wherein the drawstring is tensioned in order to restore the ceiling mesh (when rope 420 is looped around access port 104 and is cinched and passes through mesh covering upper surface 422).
In regard to claim 3, Stearns discloses wherein the ceiling frame section includes a lid (504), and wherein the lid is openable and closable to access an interior of the aquatic trap without releasing the ceiling mesh (operation of large access port 504 is independent from the small access port 506 wherein the rope 420 must be loosened in order to open the small access port 506).
In regard to claim 4, Stearns discloses wherein the entrance frame (344) is attached by an entrance frame hinge element (pivot points 352 or 412) to a support strut (see diagonally extending struts on either side of 350 in Fig. 3C’ extending to upwardly to the left from 342 in Fig. 3C” or struts on either side of 408), and wherein the tensioning element (420) is releasable to allow the entrance frame to collapse by rotating on the entrance frame hinge element (see col. 6, lines 13-29), to facilitate nested stacking of multiple crustacean traps.
In regard to claim 5, Stearns discloses a one-way gate (308) attached by a gate hinge (348) to the entrance frame (344).
In regard to claim 10, Stearns discloses wherein the floor frame section and the ceiling frame section are circular in shape (see Fig. 1).
In regard to claim 11, Stearns discloses wherein the plurality of angled struts connecting the floor frame section to the ceiling frame section are at ten to twenty degree angles from directions normal to the floor surface area and ceiling surface area (the angle of the sides 202 are between 10-20 degrees; see Fig. 2).
In regard to claim 13, Stearns, Hayes, and Senf disclose wherein the trap frame further comprises one or more of an escape ring (103 of Senf) or an escape window (see Fig. of 3C’ of Stearns which has an escape window just below the lower free ends of the entry bars 308 or the space between the entry bars 308 which allow smaller animals to pass therethrough/therebetween; structure of the escape window not being particularly claimed).
In regard to claim 22, Stearns, Hayes, and Senf disclose wherein the escape window (claim 13 recites “wherein the trap frame further comprises one or more of an escape ring or an escape window” and therefore since Stearns, Hayes, and Senf disclose an escape ring, then the limitations that pertain to the escape window are not required to be taught by Stearns, Hayes, and Senf since the escape ring and escape window were alternatively recited through the use of the term “or” and therefore it is only required that one of the ring and window be taught by the references) comprises a crossbar extending between angled struts above an entrance frame, the crossbar spaced beneath the ceiling frame to cooperatively define the escape window with the ceiling frame.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stearns 8,402,689 in view of AU 2012203103 to Hayes and Senf 2019/0343100 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of KR 10-0775966 to Kim.
Alternatively Stearns, Hayes, and Senf disclose a trap configuration wherein a ceiling frame section (see Fig. 5 of Stearns) including a small access port (506 of Stearns) and a large access port/lid (504 of Stearns) to remove capture crustaceans, wherein rope (420 of Stearns) may be loosened to open small access port (506 of Stearns) so that the user may reach therethrough to remove crustaceans, but do not disclose wherein the lid is openable and closable to access an interior of the aquatic trap without releasing the ceiling mesh. Kim discloses a fish trap wherein a floor frame section (110) includes a lid (120), and wherein the lid (120) is openable (see Fig. 3) and closable (see Fig. 2) to access an interior of the aquatic trap without release the floor mesh (122; floor mesh releasable via 164, 166, 168). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the lid of Stearns, Hayes, and Senf such that it is openable and closable to access an interior of the aquatic trap without releasing the ceiling mesh in view of Kim in order to selectively access the interior of the trap to either have the user reach through a smaller opening through the ceiling mesh to remove caught individual crustaceans or to provide a larger opening to dump the contents of the trap all at once.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stearns 8,402,689 in view of AU 2012203103 to Hayes and Senf 2019/0343100 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Holland 693,391 or Park 2017/0231206.
In regard to claim 7, Stearns, Hayes, and Senf do not disclose wherein the entrance mesh comprises an upper mesh having mesh openings of a first size, and a lower mesh having mesh openings of a second size, the second size being smaller than the first size. Holland and Park disclose wherein the entrance mesh comprises an upper mesh (4; see Figs. 3, 4 OR 10) having mesh openings of a first size, and a lower mesh (10; see Figs. 2, 3 OR 30) having mesh openings of a second size, the second size being smaller than the first size (see Figs. 2, 3 OR see Fig. 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the entrance mesh of Stearns, Hayes, and Senf such that it comprises an upper mesh having mesh openings of a first size, and a lower mesh having mesh openings of a second size, the second size being smaller than the first size in view of Holland or Park in order to provide a surface upon which crustaceans can easily walk upon in order to advance easily into the trap for capture thereof.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stearns 8,402,689 in view of AU 2012203103 to Hayes and Senf 2019/0343100 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of KR 10-1174805 to Cho.
Stearns, Hayes, and Senf do not disclose wherein the weight bar is configured in a “Y” shape consisting of three members joined at a middle of the floor surface area. Cho discloses the weight bar is configured in a “Y” shape consisting of three members joined at a middle of the floor surface area (a down support stand 220 with first 221, second 222, and third 223 down support stands which are each formed with the angle of 120°; see Figs. 1, 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the weight bar of Stearns, Hayes, and Senf such that it is configured in a “Y” shape consisting of three members joined at a middle of the floor surface area in view of Cho in order to provide a weight bar that is connected to the floor frame equidistantly from each other so as to provide even structural support to the base of the trap to prevent potential collapse of the trap when experience stress forces during usage.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stearns 8,402,689 in view of AU 2012203103 to Hayes and Senf 2019/0343100 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of KR 10-2011-0115637 to Joo or CA 1,110,850 to Imbeault or Sjolund 4,221,071.
Stearns, Hayes, and Senf disclose not disclose multiple entrance frames (301 of Senf) attached to multiple entrance meshes (401 on 301 of Senf) and forming multiple entrances into the crustacean trap, but do not disclose wherein the tensioning element extends between the multiple entrance frames. Joo, Imbeault, and Sjolund disclose multiple entrance frames (160 OR 60, 62 OR 66) attached to multiple entrance meshes (200, 220, 242, 246 OR mesh of 60, 62 OR 50, 56, 58) and forming multiple entrances into the crustacean trap, and wherein the tensioning element (260 OR 68 OR 54) extends between the multiple entrance frames. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the trap of Stearns, Hayes, and Senf such that the tensioning element extends between the multiple entrance frames in view of Joo or Imbeault or Sjolund in order to utilize a common element that can be used to unitarily bias the entrance frames and entrances toward the middle of the trap so as to provide the necessary erected openings for the crustaceans to enter the fully erected trap.
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stearns 8,402,689 in view of AU 2012203103 to Hayes and Senf 2019/0343100 as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Ward et al. 1,728,645.
In regard to claim 23, Stearns and Senf disclose at least one escape ring (103 of Senf) located in the trap frame (100 with 102,104,106,109 of Senf) above each entrance frame (301 of Senf), but do not disclose at least one escape ring at the level of the floor frame. Ward et al. disclose at least one escape vent (exit trap doors 2) at the level of the floor frame (cage base member 1 with bottom frame 1a), wherein undersized lobsters which enter the trap (see Figs. 1-2) will ordinarily work toward the corners of the trap where the small trap doors (2) are positioned (see lines 101-108). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the at least one escape ring of Stearns and Senf such that it is at the level of the floor frame of the trap in view of Ward et al. in order to provide a means which facilitates the escape of undersized crustaceans that is located at the lowest level of the trap where the undersized crustaceans are crawling within the confines of the trap after entry therein.
Claim(s) 14, 16, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stearns 8,402,689 in view of Rainey, Jr. 5,259,809.
In regard to claim 14, Stearns discloses an aquatic trap, comprising: a trap frame (102), comprising: a floor frame section (bottom of 102) defining a floor surface area (see Fig. 1); a ceiling frame section (top of 102) defining a ceiling surface area (206; see Figs. 1-2), wherein said ceiling surface area is larger than said floor surface area (see Figs. 1-2); and a plurality of angled struts (vertically extending portions of 102) connecting the floor frame section to the ceiling frame section and defining a tapered side between the floor frame section and the ceiling frame section (see Figs. 1-2); a floor mesh (110 on bottom of 102) extending over the floor surface area; a side mesh (110 extending along sides of 102) extending over a first portion of the tapered side; an entrance mesh (mesh of 324, 356, or 414) extending inwardly from a second portion of the tapered side; a collapsible entrance frame (344) attached to the entrance mesh and forming an entrance into the aquatic trap (see Fig. 3C’); a biasing mechanism (420) to bias the entrance frame in a vertical orientation; and a ceiling mesh (422) extending over the ceiling surface area, wherein the ceiling mesh is releasable to allow nested stacking of multiple aquatic traps (when rope 420 is loosened to thereby release tension in holding access port 104 closed/taut), and wherein the ceiling mesh is restorable for aquatic trap deployment (when rope 420 is looped around access port 104 and is cinched and passes through mesh covering upper surface 422), but does not disclose at least one escape window located in the trap frame directly above each entrance frame. Rainey, Jr. discloses at least one the escape window (see vertically oriented rectangularly shaped escape windows of 2 in Figs. 1-2 that extend between top plate 26 and upper extents of capture gates 4; cage 2 is constructed of an open mesh 18 which is relatively open construction having openings sufficiently large in proportion to the size of cage 2 that most small organisms can freely pass into and out of the cage 2 and such that the cage 2 provides little resistance to the flow of water; see col. 3, lines 52-57) located in the trap frame (harvester 1 in the form of a wire mesh cage 2 comprising top plate 26 and bottom plate 28 connected by side member 30 comprising straight line sections 32) directly above each entrance frame (each gate 4 is in the form of an inward extending truncated prism, ending in a smaller trap opening 8 at its inner end, each trap opening has a top 36 and a bottom 38 which form each entrance frame). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the aquatic trap of Stearns such that it comprises at least one escape window located in the trap frame directly above each entrance frame in view of Rainey, Jr. in order to provide a means for allowing most small organisms, which are not the intended targets of capture within the aquatic trap, to freely pass into and out of the aquatic trap.
In regard to claim 16, Stearns discloses wherein the biasing mechanism comprises an elastic element (rope 420 may be elastic or have an elastic section to actively maintain tension when pulled; see col. 6, lines 9-12).
In regard to claim 18, Stearns discloses wherein the entrance frame is a wide aspect ratio entrance frame (entrance defined by frame 344 has a greater width dimension than a height dimension; see Fig. 3C’).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stearns 8,402,689 in view of Rainey, Jr. 5,259,809 as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Ougland 2,769,274 or Gibbs 1,445,763.
In regard to claim 15, Stearns does not disclose wherein the biasing mechanism comprises a coil. Ougland and Gibbs disclose a biasing mechanism (pair of coiled springs 25 OR coil springs 41) comprises a coil. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the biasing mechanism of Stearns such that it comprises a coil in view of Ougland or Gibbs in order to a common off the shelf item that provides means which can serve to tension the entrance frame toward the interior of the trap so as to maintain the orientation of the entrance frame in an upright position for allowing target animals to easily enter the trap during use.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stearns 8,402,689 in view of Rainey, Jr. 5,259,809 as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Aho 4,354,325 or KR 20-2010-0004903.
In regard to claim 17, Stearns does not disclose wherein the elastic element extends between a frame lever affixed between the entrance frame and a perimeter of the aquatic trap. Aho and KR ‘903 disclose wherein the elastic element (59 OR 113) extends between a frame lever (30, 34 OR 500) affixed between the entrance frame (16, 57 OR 111-112) and a perimeter of the aquatic trap (perimeter defined by frame 12 OR perimeter defined by 101). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the trap of Stearns such that wherein the elastic element extends between a frame lever affixed between the entrance frame and a perimeter of the aquatic trap in view of Aho or KR ‘903 in order to provide a secure fastening anchor location for the elastic element within the confines of the trap which can serve to tension the entrance frame toward the interior of the trap so as to maintain the orientation of the entrance frame in an upright position for allowing target animals to easily enter the trap during use.
Claim(s) 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stearns 8,402,689 in view of Rainey, Jr. 5,259,809 and as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Senf 2019/0343100 and Ward et al. 1,728,645.
In regard to claim 23, Stearns and Rainey, Jr. do not disclose at least one escape ring. Senf discloses a nesting crab trap (100) with at least one escape ring (103) to provide an escape path for fish and other wildlife (see para. 0016). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the aquatic trap of Stearns such that it comprises at least one escape ring in view of Senf in order to provide a means for fish and other unintended targets to escape from the confines of the trap so that the user does not have to sort the entirety of the catch in order to release the unintended targets. Stearns, Rainey, Jr., and Senf disclose at least one escape ring (103 of Senf) located in the trap frame (100 with 102,104,106,109 of Senf) above each entrance frame (301 of Senf), but do not disclose at least one escape ring at the level of the floor frame. Ward et al. disclose at least one escape vent (exit trap doors 2) at the level of the floor frame (cage base member 1 with bottom frame 1a), wherein undersized lobsters which enter the trap (see Figs. 1-2) will ordinarily work toward the corners of the trap where the small trap doors (2) are positioned (see lines 101-108). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the at least one escape ring of Stearns, Rainey, Jr., and Senf such that it is at the level of the floor frame of the trap in view of Ward et al. in order to provide a means which facilitates the escape of undersized crustaceans that is located at the lowest level of the trap where the undersized crustaceans are crawling within the confines of the trap after entry therein.
Claim(s) 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stearns 8,402,689 in view of Senf 2019/0343100 and Ward et al. 1,728,645.
Stearns discloses an aquatic trap, comprising: a trap frame (102), comprising: a floor frame section (bottom of 102) defining a floor surface area (see Fig. 1); a ceiling frame section (top of 102) defining a ceiling surface area (206; see Figs. 1-2), wherein said ceiling surface area is larger than said floor surface area (see Figs. 1-2); and a plurality of angled struts (vertically extending portions of 102) connecting the floor frame section to the ceiling frame section and defining a tapered side between the floor frame section and the ceiling frame section (see Figs. 1-2); a floor mesh (110 on bottom of 102) extending over the floor surface area; a side mesh (110 extending along sides of 102) extending over a first portion of the tapered side; an entrance mesh (mesh of 324, 356, or 414) extending inwardly from a second portion of the tapered side; a collapsible entrance frame (344) attached to the entrance mesh and forming an entrance into the aquatic trap (see Fig. 3C’); a biasing mechanism (420) to bias the entrance frame in a vertical orientation; and a ceiling mesh (422) extending over the ceiling surface area, wherein the ceiling mesh is releasable to allow nested stacking of multiple aquatic traps (when rope 420 is loosened to thereby release tension in holding access port 104 closed/taut), and wherein the ceiling mesh is restorable for aquatic trap deployment (when rope 420 is looped around access port 104 and is cinched and passes through mesh covering upper surface 422), but does not disclose an adjustable weighting system comprising multiple weight attachment points on the aquatic trap or at least one escape ring. Senf discloses a nesting crab trap (100) with an adjustable weighting system (105) comprising multiple weight attachment points (two large iron bars 105 attached to the bottom ring 109 to provide cathodic protection, weight to keep the trap on the bottom of the ocean, and being arranged in an even distribution of weight as shown in Figs. 2 & 4) on the aquatic trap and at least one escape ring (103) to provide an escape path for fish and other wildlife (see para. 0016). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the aquatic trap of Stearns such that it comprises an adjustable weighting system comprising multiple weight attachment points on the aquatic trap and at least one escape ring in view of Senf in order to provide sufficient ballast to hold the trap to the bottom of the body of water, wherein the weight is evenly distributed on the trap and to provide a means for fish and other unintended targets to escape from the confines of the trap so that the user does not have to sort the entirety of the catch in order to release the unintended targets. Stearns and Senf disclose at least one escape ring (103 of Senf) located in the trap frame (100 with 102,104,106,109 of Senf) above each entrance frame (301 of Senf), but do not disclose at least one escape ring at the level of the floor frame. Ward et al. disclose at least one escape vent (exit trap doors 2) at the level of the floor frame (cage base member 1 with bottom frame 1a), wherein undersized lobsters which enter the trap (see Figs. 1-2) will ordinarily work toward the corners of the trap where the small trap doors (2) are positioned (see lines 101-108). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the at least one escape ring of Stearns and Senf such that it is at the level of the floor frame of the trap in view of Ward et al. in order to provide a means which facilitates the escape of undersized crustaceans that is located at the lowest level of the trap where the undersized crustaceans are crawling within the confines of the trap after entry therein.
In regard to claim 20, Stearns and Senf disclose wherein at least some of the multiple weight attachment points (locations where iron bars 105 are attached to bottom ring 109 in Fig. 4 are symmetrical with respect to the center of the trap) are distributed symmetrically within a perimeter of the aquatic trap (perimeter defined by 109; see Figs. 1-4 of Senf).
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stearns 8,402,689 in view of Senf 2019/0343100 and Ward et al. 1,728,645 as applied to claim 19 above, and further in view of Kuroda et al. 5,157,864.
In regard to claim 21, Stearns, Senf and Ward et al. do not disclose a weight bar attached to the floor frame section, and wherein the multiple weight attachment points are on the weight bar. Kuroda et al. disclose a weight bar (27) attached to the floor frame section (floor of 23), and wherein the multiple weight attachment points (28) are on the weight bar (27; see Figs. 8-9). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the trap of Stearns, Senf, and Ward et al. such that it comprises a weight bar attached to the floor frame section and wherein the multiple weight attachment points are on the weight bar in view of Kuroda et al. in order to provide multiple locations upon a secure structure on the floor frame at which adjustable masses may be attached to the trap for proper adjustment of the weight of the trap and adjustment of the upright alignment of the trap when submerged in the body of water for enhanced ballast and weight for the structure (see col. 3, line 54 to col. 4, line 5 of Kuroda et al.).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 24 and 26 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DARREN W ARK whose telephone number is (571)272-6885. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5.
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, Kimberly Berona can be reached at (571) 272-6909. 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.
/DARREN W ARK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3647
DWA