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 the Application
Receipt of the Response and Amendment after Non-Final Office Action filed May 6, 2026 is acknowledged.
The status of the claims upon entry of the present amendments stands as follows:
Pending claims:
1-25
Withdrawn claims:
1-11
Previously canceled claims:
None
Newly canceled claims:
None
Amended claims:
12
New claims:
None
Claims currently under consideration:
12-25
Currently rejected claims:
12-25
Allowed claims:
None
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 12 – 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Axelrod (US 2018/0168127 A1), and further in view of Davison (US 2003/0104020 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Axelrod teaches a method of forming a microporous animal chew (a method of forming a microporous animal chew, [0005]), comprising:
providing a wet rawhide sheet having a thickness in the range of 0.5 millimeters to 4.0 millimeters including water present at 60 % by weight of the total weight of the wet rawhide sheet or greater (providing a wet rawhide sheet including water present, [0005], while wet (water level greater than 60%), thickness is in range of 0.5 mm to 4.0mm, [0018], where both ranges match the respective claimed ranges of “0.5 millimeters to 4.0 millimeters” and “at 60 %...by weight…or greater”);
piercing said wet rawhide sheet with pins and forming micropores in said rawhide sheet (rawhide sheet pierced with pins to form micropores, [0005] where the pins may be hollow, ([0019]), wherein said micropores have a largest linear cross-sectional length in the range of 1 micrometer to 2,000 micrometers (largest linear cross-sectional length in the range of 1 micrometer to 2,000 micrometers, [0005], which matches the claimed range of “1 micrometer to 2,000 micrometers”) and are arranged to provide a pore density in the range of 1 to 100 pores per square centimeter (provide a pore density in the range of 1 to 100 pores per square centimeter, [0005], which matches the claimed range of “1 to 100 pores per square centimeter”), wherein the pores have a penetration depth in the range of 0.1 mm to 3.0 mm (the wet rawhide sheet has a thickness of 0.5 mm to 4 mm and the pores are formed in the sheet while wet ([0018]) and the pores go through the entire thickness of the rawhide sheet (Fig. 3a, no. 302; [0021]). Thus, the pores have a depth of 0.5 mm to 4 mm, which overlaps with the claimed range of “0.1 mm to 3.0 mm);
partially filling said micropores, wherein the support additive prevents the micropores from closing during drying (a support additive may be loaded into the micropores through pins that are hollow and injected upon pore formation, and as the rawhide shrinks, the support additive presents the pores from closing; [0023]); and
drying said wet rawhide sheet, wherein said dried rawhide sheet includes 1 to 20 % by weight water of the total weight of the dried rawhide sheet (the rawhide sheet is dried to include includes 1 to 20 % by weight water of the total weight of the rawhide sheet, [0005], which matches the claimed range of “1 to 20 % by weight water”).
Axelrod does not teach filling the hollow pins with chitosan and injecting chitosan into the micropores.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Davison teaches using chitosan on animal chews for oral care in pets ([0168]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the process of making a rawhide chew as taught by Axelrod with the use of chitosan taught by Davison as the additive that is inserted during pore formation. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification because Davison teaches that chitosan provides gum and teeth benefits ([0168]). Although Davison teaches applying chitosan to the outside of a pet chew, Axelrod teaches that the micropores extend through the rawhide sheet ([0004]). Therefore, it logically follows that the inside of the micropore can be considered a surface of the rawhide chew. Furthermore, one of ordinary skill would recognize that filling the micropores of the rawhide chew disclosed by Axelrod with chitosan would bring the chitosan in contact with the animal’s teeth as the animal bites into the rawhide.
Regarding claim 13, Axelrod as modified by Davison teach all elements of claim 12 as described above. Axelrod also teaches further comprising removing a portion of water present in said wet rawhide sheet prior to drying (dried or further processed before drying step, [0015]).
Regarding claim 14, Axelrod as modified by Davison teach all elements of claim 12 as described above. Axelrod also teaches further comprising stretching said wet rawhide sheet prior to drying (drying occurs under tension [0024], tension in this instance is synonymous with stretching). If the rawhide is dried under tension, it necessarily follows that the rawhide would have been put under tension prior to drying occurring.
Regarding claim 15, Axelrod as modified by Davison teach all elements of claim 12 as described above. Axelrod also teaches wherein said wet rawhide sheet is provided between a carrier plate and a receiving plate, wherein said carrier plate carries said pins, and piercing said wet rawhide sheet includes forcing said plates together (Fig. 3, carrier plate 306 carries pins 304 and receiving plate 308 is where pins are received, [0021]).
Regarding claim 16, Axelrod as modified by Davison teach all elements of claim 15 as described above. Axelrod also teaches wherein said receiving plate includes holes to receive said pins therein (Fig. 3, receiving plate 308 may contain a plurality of holes 310, [0021]).
Regarding claim 17, Axelrod as modified by Davison teach all elements of claim 15 as described above. Axelrod also teaches further comprising compressing said wet rawhide sheet between said plates to remove at least a portion of water present in said wet rawhide sheet (plates may come together and squeeze excess water from hide, [0021]).
Regarding claim 18, Axelrod as modified by Davison teach all elements of claim 12 as described above. Axelrod also teaches wherein said wet rawhide sheet is fed into calendar rollers, wherein one of said rollers includes said pins and said pins pierce said wet rawhide sheet as said pins bear against a bearing roll (Pins are forced through rawhide utilizing equipment that can provide sufficient pressure to pierce the rawhide; example includes calendaring rolls, [0021]. Fig. 4, calendaring equipment 400 with a series of rolls, one roll is bearing roll 404 and one roll is pin roll 406, [0022]).
Regarding claim 19, Axelrod as modified by Davison teach all elements of claim 18 as described above. Axelrod also teaches further comprising compressing said wet rawhide sheet between a squeeze roll and said bearing roll and removing a portion of said water present in said wet rawhide sheet (Fig.4 squeeze roll 410, which is preloaded against the bearing roll 404, may be used to remove excess water, [0022]).
Regarding claim 20, Axelrod as modified by Davison teach all elements of claim 19 as described above. Axelrod also teaches further comprising stretching said wet rawhide sheet prior to drying by passing said wet rawhide sheet between tenter rolls (Fig. 4, tenter rolls 412, 414, 416, and 418 to apply tension, [0024]). If the rawhide is dried under tension, it necessarily follows that the rawhide would have been put under tension prior to drying occurring.
Regarding claim 21, Axelrod as modified by Davison teach all elements of claim 12 as described above. Axelrod also teaches further comprising filling said micropores with a support additive prior to drying (pores are filled with support additives which are retained in the micropores upon drying, [0026]). If the support additive is retained due to shrinking of rawhide during drying, it necessarily follows that the additives must be applied prior to the drying step.
Regarding claim 22, Axelrod as modified by Davison teach all elements of claim 12 as described above. Axelrod also teaches wherein said pins pierce said wet rawhide sheet at an angle α relative to a surface of said wet rawhide, wherein α is in the range of 10 to 80 degrees (the angle of micropores may be in the range of 10 to 80 degrees [0024], which matches the claimed range of “in the range of 10 to 80 degrees.”).
Regarding claim 23, Axelrod as modified by Davison teach all elements of claim 22 as described above. Axelrod also teaches wherein said micropores exhibit a length that is greater than the thickness of said wet rawhide sheet (Fig. 5, length l greater than thickness t, [0024]).
Regarding claim 24, Axelrod as modified by Davison teach all elements of claim 12 as described above. Axelrod also teaches wherein said wet rawhide sheet includes a rawhide resin composition (rawhide can be rawhide resin composition, [0016]).
Regarding claim 25, Axelrod as modified by Davison teach all elements of claim 12 as described above. Axelrod also teaches wherein said dried rawhide has a thickness of 0.1 millimeters to 3.0 millimeters (a lower water levels, sheet has a preferred thickness of 0.1 to 3.0 mm [0015], which matches the claimed range of “thickness of 0.1 millimeters to 3.0 millimeters.”).
Response to Arguments
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. §103 of claims 12-25 over Axelrod and Davison: Applicant’s arguments filed May 6, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argued that Davison disclosing applying chitosan to the outside of a pet chew does not have relevance to the fact that the inside of a micropore is considered a surface (Remarks, p. 6, ¶ 6- p. 7, ¶ 1).
This argument has been considered. However, the Examiner maintains that the micropores would constitute an external surface of the rawhide pet chew. Regardless, the 35 USC 103 rejection above describes using the chitosan of Davison as the support additive of Axelrod rather than merely applying as a coating as taught by Davison. Thus, chitosan used in place of a support additive would be applied to the micropores of the rawhide chew.
Applicant also argued that one of ordinary skill would not consider using chitosan as the replacement for the support additive in Axel rod because the chitosan of Davison is used as a coating rather than a support additive. Applicant further argued that the support additives of Axelrod are different than chitosan and one would not have a reasonable expectation of success (Remarks, p. 7, ¶ 2-3).
This argument has been considered. However, the Examiner maintains that one of ordinary skill would have found it obvious to use chitosan as the support additive because Davison teaches that chitosan has gum and teeth benefits, and applying chitosan to a pet chew allows for the chitosan to stay in contact with the oral cavity ([0168]). Although Davison does not disclose that chitosan would work as a support additive, chitosan is known in the art to be a polysaccharide. Axelrod discloses that the support additives include starch ([0023]), which is also a known polysaccharide. Thus, one of ordinary skill would have had a reasonable expectation of success using the chitosan of Davison as the support additive in the pet chew of Axelrod absent evidence to the contrary.
Claim Rejections – Double Patenting of claims 12-21 and 23-25 over copending Application no. 15/843,680, claims 10-23 in view of Davison and claim 22 over copending Application no. 15/843,680, claim 10 in view of Davison and Axelrod.
Applicant’s arguments filed May 6, 2026 have been fully considered but they are moot due to the abandonment of application 15/843,680. Because 15/843,680 is no longer copending, the Double Patenting rejections have been withdrawn.
The rejections of claims 12-25 have been maintained herein.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Amanda S Hawkins whose telephone number is (703)756-1530. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8:00a-4:00p, F 8:00a-1:00p 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, Emily Le can be reached at (571) 272-0903. 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.
/A.S.H./Examiner, Art Unit 1793
/EMILY M LE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1793
Prosecution Insights