DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Application
In view of the Patent Board Decision filed on June 01, 2026, PROSECUTION IS HEREBY REOPENED. A new ground of rejection is set forth below. Claims 13 and 16 remain withdrawn per the Response the Election/Restriction filed on November 27, 2023. Claims 1-20 remain pending.
A Technology Center (TC) Director has approved of reopening prosecution by signing below:
/JOSEPH THOMAS/Director, Technology Center 3600
Claim Objections
Claims 5, 9, 15, 17, and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 5 (line 2), claim 9 (line 3), claim 15 (line 2), claim 17 (line 6), and claim 19 (line 2), Applicant is suggested to amend the term “sidewall” to --side wall-- to utilize more consistent claim terminology throughout.
In claim 19 (line 3), Applicant is suggested to amend the phrase “located over at least partially over…” to --located at least partially over…-- to improve readability of the claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
The following rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 102 and § 103 are made with respect to the primary reference of Home Décor (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aDHFXCqLEY), hereinafter Home Décor.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 5, 12, and 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Home Décor (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aDHFXCqLEY), hereinafter Home Decor.
Regarding claim 1, Home Décor teaches a pet feeding device (see timestamp 0:41, “Soft Shag Chenille Rug Grey”; note that rug is capable of use for pet feeding, as feed may be placed within or on top of rug) comprising:
a floor (see annotated fig. 1 below, underside of rug);
a plurality of flexible members extending upwardly from the floor (see annotated fig. 1), each of the plurality of flexible members having a lower portion proximate to the floor and an upper portion that is distal therefrom (see annotated fig. 1);
wherein the plurality of flexible members are located across an upper surface of the floor to substantially conceal the upper surface of the floor (see annotated fig. 1, flexible members substantially conceal floor);
wherein the plurality of flexible members are formed of a flexible fabric material (see timestamp 0:41, “Soft Shag Chenille Rug Grey”) and are movable in response to a pet searching for food on the pet feeding device (see annotated fig. 1, flexible members are capable of moving in response to a pet searching for food, as is shown by interaction of flexible members with user’s hand).
PNG
media_image1.png
753
982
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 1. Home Decor, Timestamp 0:46 (Examiner-Annotated)
Regarding claim 2, Home Décor discloses the pet feeding device of claim 1, and further discloses wherein the plurality of flexible members are formed of one of a soft-microfiber and chenille fabric (see timestamp 0:41, “Soft Shag Chenille Rug Grey”; see product images).
Regarding claim 5, Home Décor discloses the pet feeding device of claim 1, and further discloses further comprising a side wall extending upward from the floor (see annotated fig. 1, at least part of side wall extends upward from a bottom end of floor), the side wall located around the plurality of flexible members (see annotated fig. 1, side wall is located around a perimeter of the plurality of flexible members).
Regarding claim 12, Home Décor discloses the pet feeding device of claim 1, and further discloses wherein the plurality of flexible members located adjacent to sides of the floor extend beyond side edges of the floor (see annotated fig. 1, note that flexible members are capable of bending over the side edge of the floor).
Regarding claim 14, Home Décor discloses a pet feeding device (see timestamp 0:41, “Soft Shag Chenille Rug Grey”; note that rug is capable of use for pet feeding, as feed may be placed within or on top of rug) comprising:
a floor (see annotated fig. 1, underside of rug);
a plurality of flexible members extending upwardly from the floor (see annotated fig. 1), each of the plurality of flexible members having a lower portion proximate to the floor and an upper portion that is distal therefrom (see annotated fig. 1), the plurality of flexible members formed of one of a soft-microfiber and chenille fabric (see timestamp 0:41, “Soft Shag Chenille Rug Grey”; see product images);
wherein the plurality of flexible members are located across an upper surface of the floor to substantially conceal the upper surface of the floor (see annotated fig. 1, flexible members substantially conceal floor);
wherein the plurality of flexible members are movable in response to a pet searching for food on the pet feeding device (see annotated fig. 1, flexible members are capable of moving in response to a pet searching for food, as is shown by interaction of flexible members with user’s hand).
Regarding claim 15, Home Décor discloses the pet feeding device of claim 14, and further discloses further comprising a side wall extending upward from the floor (see annotated fig. 1, at least part of side wall extends upward from a bottom end of floor), the sidewall located around the plurality of flexible members (see annotated fig. 1, side wall is located around a perimeter of the plurality of flexible members).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 3 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Home Décor (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aDHFXCqLEY), hereinafter Home Décor.
Regarding claim 3, Home Décor discloses the pet feeding device of claim 1, and further discloses further comprising an anti-skid portion (see timestamp 0:41, “Bathroom Mats Anti-Slip Absorbent”).
Home Décor does not appear to specifically disclose wherein the anti-skid portion is located on a bottom surface of the floor.
However, it is notoriously well known in the art that an anti-skid portion is placed on a bottom or contact surface of a structure to create friction between the bottom surface (i.e., contact surface) and a corresponding support surface (e.g., table or floor).
Regarding claim 10, Home Décor discloses the pet feeding device of claim 1, but does not appear to specifically disclose wherein the floor is formed of a durable oxford material.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have made the floor of a durable oxford material, with the motivation of utilizing well-understood materials that are resistant to wear-and-tear, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. It is further noted that no criticality has been described in the instant disclosure regarding the material choice of oxford material (see Specification, para [0036]).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Home Décor (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aDHFXCqLEY), hereinafter Home Décor, as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Weng et al. (US 2008/0008856 A1), hereinafter Weng.
Regarding claim 4, Home Décor as modified discloses the pet feeding device of claim 3, but does not appear to specifically disclose wherein the anti-skid portion comprises a plurality of circular portions on the bottom surface of the floor.
However, Weng is in the field of mats (para [0034]) and teaches wherein the anti-skid portion (substrate engaging means 106) comprises a plurality of circular portions (droplets 108) on the bottom surface of the floor (bottom surface 104; fig. 1; para [0034]-[0037] and [0040]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the mat having an anti-skid portion of Home Décor as modified to incorporate the teaching of circular portions on the bottom surface of the floor as taught by Weng with a reasonable expectation of success to effectively stabilize the device, thereby preventing unwanted movement of the device during use and further enhancing safety of the device (para [0003]-[0006]).
The following rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 102 and § 103 are made with respect to the primary reference of Conaboy (https://nymag.com/strategist/article/snuffle-bowl-feeding-mat-review.html), hereinafter Conaboy.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 5, and 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Conaboy (https://nymag.com/strategist/article/snuffle-bowl-feeding-mat-review.html), hereinafter Conaboy.
Regarding claim 1, Conaboy discloses a pet feeding device (see second paragraph, “snuffle mat”) comprising:
a floor (see annotated fig. 2 below, underside of mat, to which flexible members are attached);
a plurality of flexible members extending upwardly from the floor (see annotated fig. 2), each of the plurality of flexible members having a lower portion proximate to the floor and an upper portion that is distal therefrom (see annotated fig. 2);
wherein the plurality of flexible members are located across an upper surface of the floor to substantially conceal the upper surface of the floor (see annotated fig. 2, flexible members substantially conceal floor);
wherein the plurality of flexible members are formed of a flexible fabric material (see fourth and sixth paragraphs, flexible members are made of felt fabric) and are movable in response to a pet searching for food on the pet feeding device (see fourth paragraph, fabric strips are capable of moving to allow pet to search for food therein).
PNG
media_image2.png
599
906
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 2. Conaboy, Product Image (Examiner-Annotated)
Regarding claim 5, Conaboy discloses the pet feeding device of claim 1, and further discloses further comprising a side wall extending upward from the floor (see annotated fig. 2, side wall extends upward from a bottom end of floor), the sidewall located around the plurality of flexible members (see annotated fig. 2, side wall is located around a circumference of the plurality of flexible members).
Regarding claim 11, Conaboy discloses the pet feeding device of claim 1, and further discloses wherein the upper portion of the plurality of flexible members has a diameter that is greater than a diameter of the lower portion of the plurality of flexible members (see annotated fig. 2, note that the plurality of flexible members are positioned in a circular arrangement; since the collective upper portion of the plurality of flexible members flares outward relative to the collective lower portion of the plurality of flexible members, the upper portion of the plurality of flexible members as a whole is considered as having a diameter greater than that of the lower portion of the plurality of flexible members)1.
Regarding claim 12, Conaboy discloses the pet feeding device of claim 1, and further discloses wherein the plurality of flexible members located adjacent to sides of the floor extend beyond side edges of the floor (see annotated fig. 2, note that flexible members flare outward such that the flexible members located adjacent to sides of the floor extend outward beyond side edges of the floor).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 2, 10, and 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Conaboy (https://nymag.com/strategist/article/snuffle-bowl-feeding-mat-review.html), hereinafter Conaboy.
Regarding claim 2, Conaboy discloses the pet feeding device of claim 1, but does not appear to specifically disclose wherein the plurality of flexible members are formed of one of a soft-microfiber and chenille fabric.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have made the plurality of flexible members of a soft-microfiber or chenille fabric, with the motivation of utilizing well-understood materials that are easy to clean and comfortable to use, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. It is further noted that no criticality appears to be described in the instant disclosure regarding the material choice of soft-microfiber or chenille fabric (see Specification, para [0033]).
Regarding claim 10, Conaboy discloses the pet feeding device of claim 1, but does not appear to specifically disclose wherein the floor is formed of a durable oxford material.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have made the floor of a durable oxford material, with the motivation of utilizing well-understood materials that are resistant to wear-and-tear, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. It is further noted that no criticality has been described in the instant disclosure regarding the material choice of oxford material (see Specification, para [0036]).
Regarding claim 14, Conaboy discloses a pet feeding device (see second paragraph, “snuffle mat”) comprising:
a floor (see annotated fig. 2, underside of mat, to which flexible members are attached);
a plurality of flexible members extending upwardly from the floor (see annotated fig. 2), each of the plurality of flexible members having a lower portion proximate to the floor and an upper portion that is distal therefrom (see annotated fig. 2);
wherein the plurality of flexible members are located across an upper surface of the floor to substantially conceal the upper surface of the floor (see annotated fig. 2, flexible members substantially conceal floor);
wherein the plurality of flexible members are movable in response to a pet searching for food on the pet feeding device (see fourth paragraph, fabric strips are capable of moving to allow pet to search for food therein).
Conaboy does not appear to specifically disclose:
wherein the plurality of flexible members are formed of one of a soft-microfiber and chenille fabric.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have made the plurality of flexible members of a soft-microfiber or chenille fabric, with the motivation of utilizing well-understood materials that are easy to clean and comfortable to use, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. It is further noted that no criticality appears to be described in the instant disclosure regarding the material choice of soft-microfiber or chenille fabric (see Specification, para [0033]).
Regarding claim 15, Conaboy as modified discloses the pet feeding device of claim 14, and further discloses further comprising a side wall extending upward from the floor (see annotated fig. 2, side wall extends upward from a bottom end of floor), the sidewall located around the plurality of flexible members (see annotated fig. 2, side wall is located around a circumference of the plurality of flexible members).
Claim(s) 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Conaboy (https://nymag.com/strategist/article/snuffle-bowl-feeding-mat-review.html), hereinafter Conaboy, in view of Weng et al. (US 2008/0008856 A1), hereinafter Weng.
Regarding claim 3, Conaboy discloses the pet feeding device of claim 1, but does not appear to specifically disclose further comprising an anti-skid portion located on a bottom surface of the floor.
However, Weng is in the field of mats (para [0034]) and teaches further comprising an anti-skid portion (substrate engaging means 106) located on a bottom surface of the floor (bottom surface 104; fig. 1; para [0034]-[0036]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the mat with floor of Conaboy to incorporate the teaching of an anti-skid portion as taught by Weng with a reasonable expectation of success to effectively stabilize the device, thereby preventing unwanted movement of the device during use and further enhancing safety of the device (para [0003]-[0006]).
Regarding claim 4, Conaboy as modified discloses the pet feeding device of claim 3, and further discloses wherein the anti-skid portion (from Weng, substrate engaging means 106) comprises a plurality of circular portions (from Weng, droplets 108) on the bottom surface of the floor (from Weng, bottom surface 104; fig. 1; para [0034]-[0037] and [0040]).
Claim(s) 6-7 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Conaboy (https://nymag.com/strategist/article/snuffle-bowl-feeding-mat-review.html), hereinafter Conaboy, in view of Jones (US 6,019,244 A), hereinafter Jones.
Regarding claim 6, Conaboy discloses the pet feeding device of claim 5, and appears to further disclose further comprising a channel located around an upper edge of the side wall and a drawstring located within the channel (see annotated fig. 2). However, since said features do not appear to be explicitly shown, the following reference may also be relied upon:
Jones is in the field of pet feeding devices (title; abstract) and teaches further comprising a channel (drawstring channel 10) located around an upper edge of the side wall (upper edge of side 16) and a drawstring (drawstring 12) located within the channel (fig. 1 and 5; col 4, lines 47-56).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the pet feeding device with side wall of Conaboy to incorporate the teachings of a channel and drawstring with a reasonable expectation of success to make the device more easily compactible and portable (see section “Background”).
Regarding claim 7, Conaboy as modified discloses the pet feeding device of claim 6, and appears to further disclose comprising a closure mechanism for securing the drawstring (see annotated fig. 2). However, since said feature does not appear to be explicitly shown, the following reference may also be relied upon:
Jones further discloses comprising a closure mechanism (from Jones, cordlock 14) for securing the drawstring (from Jones, drawstring 12; fig. 1 and 5; col 4, lines 47-56).
Regarding claim 9, Conaboy as modified discloses the pet feeding device of claim 6, and further discloses wherein a height of the side wall is such that when the drawstring is pulled the upper edge of the sidewall is located at least partially over the upper portion of the plurality of flexible members (from Conaboy, see annotated fig. 2, note that due to the dimensions of the side wall and flexible fabric nature of both the side wall and the plurality of flexible members, the upper edge of the side wall would naturally be capable of being located at least partially over the upper portion of the plurality of flexible members when the drawstring is pulled).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Conaboy (https://nymag.com/strategist/article/snuffle-bowl-feeding-mat-review.html), hereinafter Conaboy, in view of Jones (US 6,019,244 A), hereinafter Jones, as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Purnell (US 2007/0050890 A1), hereinafter Purnell.
Regarding claim 8, Conaboy as modified discloses the pet feeding device of claim 7, but does not appear to specifically disclose further comprising a pocket located on an outside of the side wall adjacent to the closure mechanism of the drawstring for receiving at least a portion of the drawstring therein.
However, Purnell is in the field of drawstring mechanisms (title; abstract) and teaches further comprising a pocket (drawstring cover 1) located on an outside of the side wall (wall of garment 2) adjacent to the closure mechanism (“ends of the drawstring are tied”, para [0002]) of the drawstring (drawstring 4) for receiving at least a portion of the drawstring therein (abstract; para [0027]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the pet feeding device with drawstring and closure mechanism of Conaboy as modified to incorporate the teaching of a pocket as taught by Purnell with a reasonable expectation of success to protect the drawstring from snagging and tangling during use (para [0024]).
Claim(s) 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Conaboy (https://nymag.com/strategist/article/snuffle-bowl-feeding-mat-review.html), hereinafter Conaboy, in view of Weng et al. (US 2008/0008856 A1), hereinafter Weng, Jones (US 6,019,244 A), hereinafter Jones, and Purnell (US 2007/0050890 A1), hereinafter Purnell.
Regarding claim 17, Conaboy discloses a pet feeding device (see second paragraph, “snuffle mat”) comprising:
a floor (see annotated fig. 2, underside of mat, to which flexible members are attached);
a plurality of flexible members extending upwardly from an upper surface of the floor (see annotated fig. 2), each of the plurality of flexible members having a lower portion proximate to the floor and an upper portion that is distal therefrom (see annotated fig. 2);
a side wall extending upward from the floor (see annotated fig. 2, side wall extends upward from a bottom end of floor), the sidewall located around the plurality of flexible members (see annotated fig. 2, side wall is located around a circumference of the plurality of flexible members);
wherein the plurality of flexible members are located across the upper surface of the floor to substantially conceal the upper surface of the floor (see annotated fig. 2, flexible members substantially conceal floor);
wherein the plurality of flexible members are movable in response to a pet searching for food on the pet feeding device (see fourth paragraph, fabric strips are capable of moving to allow pet to search for food therein).
Conaboy does not appear to specifically disclose:
the floor including an anti-skid portion located on a bottom surface thereof.
However, Weng is in the field of mats (para [0034]) and teaches:
the floor (bottom surface 104) including an anti-skid portion (substrate engaging means 106) located on a bottom surface thereof (fig. 1; para [0034]-[0036]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the mat with floor of Conaboy to incorporate the teaching of an anti-skid portion as taught by Weng with a reasonable expectation of success to effectively stabilize the device, thereby preventing unwanted movement of the device during use and further enhancing safety of the device (para [0003]-[0006]).
Conaboy appears to further disclose:
a channel located around an upper edge of the side wall and a drawstring located within the channel (see annotated fig. 2);
a closure mechanism for securing the drawstring (see annotated fig. 2).
However, since said features do not appear to be explicitly shown, the following reference may also be relied upon:
Jones is in the field of pet feeding devices (title; abstract) and teaches:
a channel (drawstring channel 10) located around an upper edge of the side wall (upper edge of side 16) and a drawstring (drawstring 12) located within the channel (fig. 1 and 5; col 4, lines 47-56);
a closure mechanism (cordlock 14) for securing the drawstring (fig. 1 and 5; col 4, lines 47-56).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the pet feeding device with side wall of Conaboy to incorporate the teachings of a channel, drawstring, and closure mechanism with a reasonable expectation of success to make the device more easily compactible and portable (see section “Background”).
Furthermore, Conaboy does not appear to specifically disclose:
a pocket located on an outside of the side wall adjacent to the closure mechanism of the drawstring for receiving at least a portion of the drawstring therein.
However, Purnell is in the field of drawstring mechanisms (title; abstract) and teaches:
a pocket (drawstring cover 1) located on an outside of the side wall (wall of garment 2) adjacent to the closure mechanism (“ends of the drawstring are tied”, para [0002]) of the drawstring (drawstring 4) for receiving at least a portion of the drawstring therein (abstract; para [0027]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the pet feeding device with drawstring and closure mechanism of Conaboy to incorporate the teaching of a pocket as taught by Purnell with a reasonable expectation of success to carry supplies for the pet, such as small toys or additional treats.
Regarding claim 18, Conaboy as modified discloses the pet feeding device of claim 17, but does not appear to specifically disclose wherein the plurality of flexible members are formed of one of a soft-microfiber and chenille fabric.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have made the plurality of flexible members of a soft-microfiber or chenille fabric, with the motivation of well-understood materials that are easy to clean and comfortable to use, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. It is further noted that no criticality appears to be described in the instant disclosure regarding the material choice of soft-microfiber or chenille fabric (see Specification, para [0033]).
Regarding claim 19, Conaboy as modified discloses the pet feeding device of claim 17, and further discloses wherein a height of the side wall is such that when the drawstring is pulled the upper edge of the sidewall is located over at least partially over the upper portion of the plurality of flexible members (from Conaboy, see annotated fig. 2, note that due to the dimensions of the side wall and flexible fabric nature of both the side wall and the plurality of flexible members, the upper edge of the side wall would naturally be capable of being located at least partially over the upper portion of the plurality of flexible members when the drawstring is pulled).
Regarding claim 20, Conaboy as modified discloses the pet feeding device of claim 17, but does not appear to specifically disclose wherein the floor is formed of a durable oxford material.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have made the floor of a durable oxford material, with the motivation of utilizing well-understood materials that are resistant to wear-and-tear, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. It is further noted that no criticality has been described in the instant disclosure regarding the material choice of oxford material (see Specification, para [0036]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Gold (US 2010/0062207 A1) teaches a device having a floor and a plurality of flexible members extending upwardly from the floor, wherein the plurality of flexible members are formed of chenille fabric.
Lee (KR 20180007847 A) teaches a pet feeding device having a floor and a plurality of flexible members extending upwardly from the floor, wherein the plurality of flexible members are formed of fabric material, and wherein the upper portion of the plurality of flexible members has a width that is greater than a width of the lower portion of the plurality of flexible members.
Additional cited references made of record in the contemporaneously filed PTO-892 form and not relied upon in the instant office action are considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure and may have one or more of the elements in Applicant’s disclosure and at least claims 1, 14, and/or 17.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERICA M HUEBNER whose telephone number is (703)756-4560. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30 AM - 6:00 PM ET.
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.
/E.M.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3647
/KIMBERLY S BERONA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3647
1 Claim 11 is interpreted under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims, wherein the diameters are read as being diameters of the plurality of flexible members as a whole. However, if Applicant were to claim the diameters of the plurality of flexible members in relation to the shape of individual flexible members in the manner shown in instant Fig. 7, the feature may receive favorable consideration.
Prosecution Insights