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 .
1. Claims 21-40 are presented for examination. Claims 1-20 are cancelled.
Response to Amendment
2. Applicant cancelled claim 1-20 and replace with a new set of claims 21-40 in response to the Non-Final rejection mailed by the Office 06/21/2024. As a result, the previous rejection has been withdrawn and a new rejection has been made in its place. The Office mailed Final-Action on 02/28/2025 in response applicant filed Notice of Appeal Brief on 08/14/2025. Upon reviewing the previous has been withdrawn and a new rejection has been made in its place, see the rejection below. In addition, the claims are rejection under 101, Double Patenting.
Applicant's arguments filed 07/28/2025 on page 7-8 have been fully considered but they are persuasive.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
3. 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 21-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claim 21 and 31 recite a method and system for monitoring animal activity using a mobile device, wherein the mobile device comprises a camera, the system and method comprising: capturing an image from within the field of view using the camera, the captured image contains pet information (insignificant extra-solution activity); storing the captured image in a database (insignificant extra-solution activity); analyzing (encompasses evaluating information, Mental Process) the captured image with a processor, wherein the pet information of the captured image is compared (encompasses evaluating information, Mental Process) with one or more reference images; identifying (encompasses evaluating information, Mental Process), via the processor, pet waste characteristics based on the comparison (encompasses evaluating information, Mental Process), of the captured image with the one or more reference images, wherein the one or more reference images are stored in the database (insignificant extra-solution activity); and generating a real-time notification (insignificant extra-solution activity) associated with the identified pet waste characteristics for display on the mobile device.
Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the terms of the claim are presumed to have their plain meaning consistent with the specification as it would be interpreted by one of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2111. The step of “analyzing the capture image….”, “compared with one or more reference image” and “identifying pet waste characteristics based on the comparison of the captured image with the one or more reference images), encompasses mental processes practically performed in the human mind by observations or evaluations, judgments, and opinions. See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2), subsection III. Those limitation, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components (with or via a processor). The claim does not limit how the “analyzing”, “comparing” and “identifying” steps are performed other than reciting “with/via a processor,” nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, but for the “with /via a processor” language, the claim encompasses the user manually analyzing, comparing and identifying the image. The mere nominal recitation of a generic processor does not take the claim limitation out of the mental processes grouping. Thus, the claim recites an abstract idea (a mental process), see MPEP 2106.04(a)
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional elements, i.e., a camera (conventional device) for capturing an image, store the captured image and recalling the image from the database for comparison are insignificant pre-extra-solution activities, MPEP 2106.05(g). The processor in steps of analyzing, comparing and identifying is recited at a high level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function of processing data) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. In addition, the limitation the generating a real-time notification associated with the identified pet waste characteristics for display on the mobile device are mere data gathering and output recited at a high level of generality, and thus are insignificant post-solution activity and does not add an inventive concept. See MPEP 2106.05(g). These limitations amount to necessary data gathering (pre-solution activity) and outputting (post‑solution activity), See MPEP 2106.05 (g). This generic processor limitation is no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, those additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to the abstract idea.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed with above, with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of using a camera to capture an image is insignificant pre-solution activity (simply gathering data), storing the image in a database is a well-understood and routine, as show in Couse (US 2014/0275824 A1, Par. [0048], collect data from a camera and stores all raw data from the camera), Jensen et al. (US 10,091,972 B1,a camera to collect information and can be stored in the database and this information can be analyzed and processed), and Pradeep et al. (US 20180132455 A1 )[0003] Conventional pet monitoring systems using the mobile device include a video camera, audio or visual monitors that remotely collect aural or visual information and transmit this information to another device that allows an owner to view or hear the information. See MPEP 2106.05(g), generating notifying in real-time using display device is insignificant post-solution activity, See MPEP 2106.05(g), since merely a conventional output of the computed results or outputting the report. The claim amounts to no more than mere instructions. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a camera, processor and display cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide an inventive concept. Thus, the claims 21 and 31 are ineligible.
Claims 22 and 32, recite identifying (encompasses evaluating information, Mental Process) the pet waste characteristics includes classifying (encompasses evaluating information, Mental Process) the pet. Merely the result of applying the abstract idea, thus, the claims are ineligible.
Claims 23 and 33, recite identifying (encompasses evaluating information, Mental Process) a corresponding shape, size texture of the pet waste in the one or more reference image. Merely the result of applying the abstract idea, thus, the claims are ineligible.
Claims 24 and 34, recite identifying (encompasses evaluating information, Mental Process) the pet waste characteristics includes identifying a health attribute of the pet waste. Merely the result of applying the abstract idea, thus, the claims are ineligible.
Claims 35 and 35, recite identifying (encompasses evaluating information, Mental Process) the health attribute includes detecting (encompasses evaluating information, Mental Process) a visual indicator in the pet waste. Merely the result of applying the abstract idea, thus, the claims are ineligible
Claims 36 and 26, recite the visual indicator (insignificant post extra-solution activity) includes a color, a consistency, or a combination thereof. Merely the result of applying the abstract idea, thus, the claims are ineligible.
Claims 27 and 39, recite ‘analyzing’ (encompasses evaluating information, Mental Process) the captured image, ‘identifying’ (encompasses evaluating information, Mental Process) an animal and associating the pet information with the animal, …and wherein’ identifying’ (encompasses evaluating information, Mental Process) … ‘detecting’ a change in the size and texture of the detected (encompasses evaluating information, Mental Process) pet waste. Merely the result of applying the abstract idea, thus, the claims are ineligible.
Claims 28 and 37, recite the ‘notification is sent’ (insignificant post extra-solution activity) to a person other than a user of the mobile device. Thus, this claim recites an abstract idea and the claims are ineligible.
Claims 29, 30, 38 and 40 recite the mobile device is further configured to prompt a user of the mobile device: to approve sending the user data to a person other than the user of the mobile device; or about an option to have a real-time conversation with a veterinarian, which is considered insignificant extra-solution activity [MPEP 2106.05(d) II] and is normal routine conventional [MPEP 2106.05(g)]. Thus, this claim recites an abstract idea, and the claims are ineligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
4. 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.
4.1 Claim(s) 21-40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zedayko et al. (US 20210151137 A1) in view of Cook (US 20200093090 A1).
Regarding claim 21 and 31, Zedayko discloses a method and system for monitoring animal activity using a mobile device (Fig. 1, a system for animal health assessment), wherein the mobile device [0068] The user devices 110 ) comprises a camera ([0068], the user device 110 may include a camera 114), the method comprising the steps:
capturing an image from within the field of view using the camera ([0068], the user devices 110 for capturing an image 112 (e.g., a photograph),
wherein the captured image contains pet information ([0059], [0060], [0077], the capture image includes information about the animal 104 may include a pet (e.g., [0043],[0060], a dog, a cat, and the like));
storing the captured image in a database ([0010], the image stored in a remote database);
analyzing the captured image with a processor ([0011],[0059],[0072], Fig. 7, [0124]-[0126], a computer program product for analyzing an image. Analyzing the received image702 a health characteristic in view of a reference database to determine a treatment for the animal associated with the biological sample), wherein the pet information of the captured image(0125], Fig. 1, Fig. 7, receiving an image 103, image may include a digital photograph of a stool sample that was excreted by the animal 104), compared with one or more reference images ([0149], Fig. 7, analyzing a feature of the biological sample in view of a reference database),
identifying, via the processor, pet waste characteristics based on the comparison of the captured image with the one or more reference images ([0076],[0077], [0080], [0108],[0110], [0177]-[0178], identifying one or more associations (stored in a reference database accessible to the model) between (i) one or more features from an analysis of an image of a biological sample (e.g., a stool sample containing mucus) and characteristics of an animal that is associated with the biological sample).
wherein the one or more reference images are stored in the database ([0077] The data 142 ( a reference database) stored in a database 140. The data 142 may include a plurality of images 112 (e.g., of the same or different biological sample 103, from the same animal 104 or a different animal, and so on).
generating a real-time notification associated with the identified pet waste characteristics for display on the mobile device ([0010],[0059], Fig. 10- Fig. 12, [0200]-[0205], an alert may be provided to the user in view of the health characteristic; provides output of the analysis (e.g., a health assessment 150, which may be in the form of a report or the like) to the user 101 over the data network 102. This entire process can be done relatively quickly, e.g., in near real-time (such as less than five minutes, less than one minute, or mere seconds)).
However, Zedayko does not specifically notifying identifying the pet waste characteristic display on the mobile device. Cook discloses in Fig. 33, 34, [0088]-[0090], graphic user interfaces 3300, 3400 displayed on the user interface. The server 3822 may detect blood in a stool when analyzing an image. Such detection prompts a health notice transmission to the user interface 3820. The image is accessed by the user at the user interface 3820, a health notification is issued to the user via the user interface 3820 The images and health notification provide a user with both early and real-time indications).
Cook and Zedayko are analogous art. They relate to animal health monitoring.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify monitoring the pet's health and providing the pet owner with wireless remote control, taught by Cook, incorporated with analyzing an image of a biological sample to provide a health assessment of an animal, taught by Zedayko, in order to improve the animal health by monitoring the animal activity in a real time and providing more precise health planning and useful information.
Regarding claim 22, Cook discloses the pet information includes pet waste, wherein identifying the pet waste characteristics includes classifying the pet waste as liquid pet waste or solid pet waste ([0075], Fig. 33, [0089], The server is configured to analyze the image of the pet pad for the presence of waste. The server detects solid waste in the image and detects liquid waste in the image, issuing a command to the pet machine upon detection based on the type of waste).
Regarding claim 23, Zedayko discloses classifying the pet waste ([0018], the plurality of images is classified according to the mucus scale. In this manner, a predictive computer vision model may be programmed to self-classify biological samples within images into these grades. Inputting the input image into the model, and receiving the output including one of the number of grades for the input image) is based on identifying a corresponding shape of the pet waste in the one or more reference images, a corresponding size of the pet waste in the one or more reference images, a corresponding texture of the pet waste in the one or more reference images, or a combination thereof ([0010], [0018], [0081], [0018], analyzing the health characteristic in view of a reference database to determine a geometric attribute, a texture attribute, and a color attribute within the one or more regions of interest to identify one or more features of the stool sample. The stool sample may include at least one of a color, a texture, a number of binaries, an area, a perimeter, a circularity, a mass, an eccentricity, a major axis, a minor axis, a viscosity, a consistency, a moisture content, a solidity, an extent, an equivalent diameter, a coherence, a reflectance, a diffusivity, and a presence of a non-stool substance).
Regarding claims 24 and 34, combination of Zedayko and Cook disclose:
Zedayko discloses identifying the pet waste characteristics includes identifying a health attribute of the pet waste ([0010], [0119], [0210], Fig. 9-10, analyzing the output of the model in view of a reference database to determine one or more of the health characteristics and a treatment by calculating one or more of a geometric attribute, a texture attribute, and a color attribute within the one or more regions of interest to identify one or more features of the stool sample).
Cook discloses identifying the pet waste characteristics includes identifying a health attribute of the pet waste ([0072], [0074], user data may include: animal detection, animal identification, and health issues or attribute; determine the presence of a pet, waste, waste characteristics (e.g., type of waste, health issues or attributes).
Regarding claims 25 and 35, combination of Zedayko and Cook disclose:
Zedayko discloses identifying the health attribute includes detecting a visual indicator in the pet waste (Abstract, [0009], [0010], [0078], [0201]-[0305], Fig. 9-12, presenting the health characteristic to a user in a user interface associated with the animal. The user device 110 receiving output of an analysis of the image 112 over the data network 102, e.g., displaying such output on a graphical user interface 116).
Cook discloses identifying the health attribute includes detecting a visual indicator in the pet waste ([0074], After the server 3240 analyzes the image and generates user data, the server may transmit the user data to the user interface 3230 for the user to review the results 3210, the user data include waste characteristics (e.g., type of waste, health issues or attributes)).
Regarding claims 26 and 36, combination of Zedayko and Cook disclose:
Zedayko discloses the visual indicator includes a color, a consistency, or a combination thereof ([0144]-[0145], Fig. 10, color yellowish, 1012 , a consistency loose BSS=6, 1012).
Cook discloses the visual indicator includes a color, a consistency, or a combination thereof ([0074], The image characteristics may be based on the type of waste, consistency of the waste, the color of the waste, or the presence of blood in the waste).
Regarding claims 27 and 39, Zedayko discloses prior to analyzing the captured image, identifying an animal and associating the pet information with the animal ([0010], The image may include metadata. The metadata may include a questionnaire response related to one or more of a health, a behavior, a current diet, a supplement, a medication, ethnographic information, a breed, a weight of the animal, a weight of the biological sample, DNA gene sequencing (of either the host organism and/or the gastrointestinal microflora (also known as microbiome)), and a size of the animal),
wherein the one or more reference images include one or more historical pet waste images associated with the animal ([0010],[0045], [0077],[0169], the reference database may be a historical database including data from analyses of other biological samples), and
wherein identifying the health attribute of the pet waste includes detecting a change in the size of the detected pet waste, the texture of the detected pet waste, or a combination thereof ([0010],Fig. 9, Fig. 15, a texture attribute, and a color attribute within the one or more regions of interest to identify one or more features of the stool sample).
Regarding claims 28 and 37, Cook discloses the notification is sent to a person other than a user of the mobile device ([0008],[0080], Fig. 32 and Fig. 38, the notification send to the server).
Regarding claim 29, Cook discloses prompting a user of the mobile device to approve sending the pet information or health attributes to a person other than the user (Fig. 34, allow to share information 3410).
Regarding claims 30 and 40, Zedayko discloses prompting a user of the mobile device to approve sending the pet information or health attributes to a person other than the user; and prompting the user about an option to have a real-time conversation with a veterinarian and ([0208] the display 1002 may include one or more selections 1112, which may include hyperlinks, selection 1112 in the example of FIG. 11 may direct a user to a veterinary health website or the like).
Regarding claims 32, Zedayko discloses a network connection configured to transmit the pet information to a remote computing device (Fig. 1) wherein the remote computing device is configured to identify the pet waste characteristics and generate the notification ([0059], Fig. 1, a user 101 may capture or otherwise retrieve an image 103 of the biological sample 103 related to the animal 104, transmit that image 103 over the data network 102 to a remote computing resource 120 for processing and analysis, where the remote computing resource 120 then provides output of the analysis (e.g., a health assessment 150, which may be in the form of a report or the like) to the user 101 over the data network 102).
Regarding claim 33, the combination of Cook and Zedayko disclose:
Cook discloses the pet information includes pet waste, and identifying the pet waste characteristics includes classifying the pet waste as liquid pet waste or solid pet waste ([0075], Fig. 33, [0089], The server is configured to analyze the image of the pet pad for the presence of waste. The server detects solid waste in the image and detects liquid waste in the image, issuing a command to the pet machine upon detection based on the type of waste); and
Zedayko discloses classifying the pet waste ([0018], the plurality of images is classified according to the mucus scale. In this manner, a predictive computer vision model may be programmed to self-classify biological samples within images into these grades. Inputting the input image into the model, and receiving the output including one of the number of grades for the input image) is based on identifying a corresponding shape of the pet waste in the one or more reference images, a corresponding size of the pet waste in the one or more reference images, a corresponding texture of the pet waste in the one or more reference images, or a combination thereof ([0010], [0018], [0081], [0018], analyzing the health characteristic in view of a reference database to determine a geometric attribute, a texture attribute, and a color attribute within the one or more regions of interest to identify one or more features of the stool sample. The stool sample may include at least one of a color, a texture, a number of binaries, an area, a perimeter, a circularity, a mass, an eccentricity, a major axis, a minor axis, a viscosity, a consistency, a moisture content, a solidity, an extent, an equivalent diameter, a coherence, a reflectance, a diffusivity, and a presence of a non-stool substance).
Regarding claim 38, Cook discloses prompting a user of the mobile device to approve sending the pet information or health attributes to a person other than the user (Fig. 34, allow to share information 3410); the notification is sent to a person other than a user of the mobile device ([0008],[0080], Fig. 32 and Fig. 38, the notification send to the server).
Double Patenting
5. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 21-26, 31-36 and 39 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-5 and 11-15 of copending Application No. 19/377,453 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both the instant application and the copending Application has similar or identical limitation, as mapping in the table for the corresponding limitations between the copending application and instant application.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
US Patent Instant application 18/511,345
US Patent copending Application 19/377,453
Claim 21. A method for monitoring animal activity using a mobile device, wherein the mobile device comprises a camera, the method comprising the steps:
capturing an image from within the field of view using the camera, wherein the captured image contains pet information;
storing the captured image in a database;
analyzing the captured image with a processor, wherein the pet information of the captured image is compared with one or more reference images;
identifying, via the processor, pet waste characteristics based on the comparison of the captured image with the one or more reference images, wherein the one or more reference images are stored in the database; and
generating a real-time notification associated with the identified pet waste characteristics for display on the mobile device.
Claim 31 has the same limitation as claim 21
Claim 1. A method for monitoring animal activity at a waste collection area using a control module, wherein the control module comprises a camera, the method comprising the steps:
capturing an image of the waste collection area using the camera, wherein the captured image contains pet information;
storing the captured image in a database;
analyzing the captured image with a processor, wherein the pet information of the captured image is compared with one or more reference images;
identifying, via the processor, pet waste characteristics based on the comparison of the captured image with the one or more reference images, wherein the one or more reference images are stored in the database; and
generating a real-time notification associated with the identified pet waste characteristics for display on a mobile device.
Claim 11 has the same limitation as claim 1
Claim 21. The method of claim 21, wherein the pet information includes pet waste, and wherein identifying the pet waste characteristics includes classifying the pet waste as liquid pet waste or solid pet waste.
Claim 32 has the same limitation as claim 21
Claim 2. The method of claim 1, wherein the pet information includes pet waste, and wherein identifying the pet waste characteristics includes classifying the pet waste as liquid pet waste or solid pet waste.
Claim 12 has the same limitation as claim 2
Claim 23. The method of claim 22, wherein classifying the pet waste is based on identifying a corresponding shape of the pet waste in the one or more reference images, a corresponding size of the pet waste in the one or more reference images, a corresponding texture of the pet waste in the one or more reference images, or a combination thereof.
Claim 33 has the same limitation as claim 23
Claim 3. The method of claim 2, wherein classifying the pet waste is based on identifying a corresponding shape of the pet waste in the one or more reference images, a corresponding size of the pet waste in the one or more reference images, a corresponding texture of the pet waste in the one or more reference images, or a combination thereof.
Claim 13 has the same limitation as claim 3
Claim 24. The method of claim 23, wherein identifying the pet waste characteristics includes identifying a health attribute of the pet waste.
Claim 25. The method of claim 24, wherein identifying the health attribute includes detecting a visual indicator in the pet waste.
Claim 26. The method of claim 25, wherein the visual indicator includes a color, a consistency, or a combination thereof.
Claims 34-36 has the same limitation as claims 24-26
Claim 4. The method of claim 3, wherein identifying the pet waste characteristics includes
identifying a health attribute of the pet waste, and
wherein identifying the health attribute includes detecting a visual indicator in the pet waste,
wherein the visual indicator includes a color, a consistency, or a combination thereof
Claim 14 has the same limitation as claim 4
Claim 27. The method of claim 24, further comprising, prior to analyzing the captured image, identifying an animal and associating the pet information with the animal, wherein the one or more reference images include one or more historical pet waste images associated with the animal, and wherein identifying the health attribute of the pet waste includes detecting a change in the size of the detected pet waste, the texture of the detected pet waste, or a combination thereof.
Claim 39 has the same limitation as claim 27
Claim 5. The method of claim 4, further comprising, prior to analyzing the captured image, identifying an animal and associating the pet information with the animal, wherein the one or more reference images include one or more historical pet waste images associated with the animal, and wherein identifying the health attribute of the pet waste includes detecting a change in the size of the detected pet waste, the texture of the detected pet waste, or a combination thereof.
Claim 15 has the same limitation as claim 5
Citation Pertinent prior art
6. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Abit (US 20150150732 A1) discloses a photodetector is used as a sensor for detecting urine secretion and/or stool secretion. As urine and/or stool are secreted into the diaper, the amount of light reaching a photodetector decreases, since a greater portion of the light may now be blocked by the secretions. Generally, the amount of light reaching the photodetector changes as a function of the amount of urine and/or stool disposed inside the diaper.
Conclusion
7. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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.
8. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed Kidest Worku whose telephone number is 571-272-3737. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Ali Mohammad can be reached on 571-272-4105. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application information Retrieval IPAIRI system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PMR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAG system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217 - 9197.
/KIDEST WORKU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2119
Prosecution Insights