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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 03/30/2026 has been entered.
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, 2, 3, 5, 6,7,9,12-14, 17, 23, 24, 26 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Spiegel (US 2007/0188334 A1) in view of Navot et al. (US 2015/0379876 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Spiegel teaches a device for deterring animals (see title of Spiegel and paragraph [0014]), comprising:
PNG
media_image1.png
408
275
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
163
381
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
370
400
media_image3.png
Greyscale
a frame (floating dock 40 with 4 walls is being interpreted as a frame, see figures 2, 3, and 7 where the laser has to be arranged in a housing with walls 41, 43, 45 and 47 acting as a frame enclosing the components of the housing);
b. a mounting means (pivot pin 63; figure 3 and paragraph [0049]) adapted for mounting the device onto a structure (top surface 49 of the dock; paragraph [0049]), said mounting means (pivot pin 63; figure 3 and paragraph [0049]) being flexibly connected to the frame via a flexible connection element (53/57 combined; paragraph [0049]) adapted to allow relative movement of the frame with respect to the mounting means (It has been held that the recitation that an element is “adapted to” perform a function is not a positive limitation but only requires the ability to so perform. It does not constitute a limitation in any patentable sense. In re Hutchison, 69 USPQ 138.);
the frame comprising:
a. at least one laser light source (13) for generating at least one light beam (see paragraph [0039], [0040], [0043]);
b. a power supply (11) and associated circuit (10; see paragraph [0039[) for powering the laser light source (13; figure 1);
the device further comprising frame movement means arranged to generate movement of the frame with respect to the mounting means (see paragraph [0045] “moving means 29 are provided to allow movements of the light beams 21 within the proscribed space. The moving means 29, as will be explained in greater detail hereinafter, may oscillate the beams 21 back and forth or up and down or some combination of these movements. Up and down as well as side-to-side movements enhance effectiveness because they account for differing heights of the various waterfowl themselves”, [0049], and figure 3. Further in claim 15, the moving means moves said source in a desired pattern of motion which includes a sweeping motion as claim in claim 19 of Spiegel).
Spiegel does not explicilty teach the device further comprising frame movement means arranged to generate movement of the frame with respect to the mounting means in at least a plane perpendicular to the average direction of the laser light beam, whereby said movement is randomized.
Narvot et al. teaches a device further comprising movement means arranged to generate movement of the frame with respect to the mounting means in at least a plane perpendicular to the average direction of the laser light beam (see paragraph [0022] where direction may be a direction that is perpendicular to the plane), whereby said movement is randomized (paragraph [0086] discloses random patterns of movement).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify Spiegel to include a plane perpendicular to the average direction of the laser light beam and movement that is randomized as taught by Narvot et al. so that animals/birds are not able to discern the pattern of movement of the device (see paragraph [0086] of Narvot et al.).
Regarding claim 2, Spiegel further teaches the device for deterring animals according to claim 1, wherein the device comprises one or more vibrational movement means (see paragraph [0045] where moving means 29 oscillate the beams 21 back and forth or up and down or some combination of these movements), configured to add an additional movement component to the light beam (see paragraph [0045] where moving means 29 may oscillate the beams 21 back and forth or up and down or side-to-side movements) generated by the laser light source (13), said additional movement component varying at least in the plane perpendicular to the direction of the light beam (see paragraph [0045] where moving means 29 may oscillate the beams 21 back and forth or up and down or side-to-side movements) whereby said one or more vibration movement means may influence the relative movement between the frame and the mounting means and/or relative movement between the laser light source and the frame (see paragraph [0051] where motor 71 is activated, the platform 65 pivots in the directions of the arrow 69. When both motors are simultaneously activated, the beam splitter 19' pivots back and forth and moves up and down to cause the light beams 21 to rapidly move in quickly changing up and down and side-to-side movements which helps to startle and repel the nuisance waterfowl.),.
Regarding claim 3, Spiegel teaches the device for deterring animals according to claim 1, wherein said laser light source is suitable for generating a light beam with a wavelength between 500 nm and 600 nm (see paragraph [0055] where one preferred wavelength for a green laser beam is at or about 532 nm).
Regarding claim 5, Spiegel teaches the device for deterring animals according to claim 1, the frame movement means comprising a mechanical movement means (movement means 29; see paragraph [0045]) for generating the movement of the frame with respect to the mounting means (upper surface 49 of the dock/support structure).
Regarding claim 6, Spiegel teaches the device for deterring animals according to claim 1, the device further comprising a laser movement means (see paragraph [0045] where moving means are proved to allow movements of the light beams 21 within the proscribed space) arranged to allow relative movement of the laser light source with respect to the frame (surface 49 of dock 40; see paragraph [0049]).
Regarding claim 7, Spiegel teaches the device for deterring animals according to claim 1, the frame comprising a reflective surface (see claim 7 of Spiegel where at least one mirror is disclosed) suitable for deflecting the light beam of the laser light, away from the frame, whereby the laser light source (13) is configured to irradiate said reflective surface (see paragraph [0018] where mirrors are disclosed; claim 7 disclosed at least one mirror)
Regarding claim 9, Spiegel teaches the device for deterring animals according to claim 1, wherein the reflective surface (mirror/beam splitter 19; see claim 7 of Spiegel and paragraph [0040]) is flexibly mounted on the frame (upper surface 49 of the dock/support structure) via reflective surface movement means (29), allowing relative movement between the reflective surface (beam splitter 19; paragraph [0049]) and the laser light source (13), thereby varying the direction of the deflected light beam.
Regarding claim 12, Spiegel teaches the device for deterring animals according to claim 7, wherein the device comprises one or more vibrational movement means (see paragraph [0045] where moving means 20 allows movements of the light beams 21 within the proscribed space and may oscillate the beams 21 back and forth or up and down or some combination of these movements.), configured to, add an additional movement component to the light beam (see paragraph [0045] where moving means 29 may oscillate the beams 21 back and forth or up and down or side-to-side movements) generated by the laser light source (13), said additional movement component varying at least in the plane perpendicular to the direction of the light beam (21; paragraph [0045]), whereby said one or more vibration movement means may influence the relative movement between the frame and the mounting means and/or the relative movement between the laser light source and the frame (see paragraph [0045]) and/or the relative movement between the reflective surface and the frame.
Regarding claim 13, Spiegel teaches the device for deterring animals according to claim 1, wherein the movement of the laser light source (13/light beams 21) with respect to the frame is cyclic and has a predetermined frequency (see paragraph [0051] where the light beams 21 move rapidly changing up and down and side to side movements with helps startle and repel the nuisance waterfowl).
Regarding claim 14, Spiegel teaches the device for deterring animals according to claim 1, wherein the movement of the frame with respect to the mounting means (top surface 49 of dock 40) is cyclic and has a predetermined frequency (see paragraph [0049] where the moving means 29 comprising a motor 51 rotates shaft 53 and the rod 57 reciprocates back and forth in an arcuate motion over the top surface 49 of the dock 40 which is interpreted as the mounting means).
Regarding claim 17, Spiegel teaches the device for deterring animals according to claim 1, wherein the device comprises a rangefinder for measuring the free path length of the light beam (21; paragraph [0049]), and whereby the movement speed of the laser light source (13; paragraph [0039]) and/or the deflection surface is adjusted based on the free path length.
Regarding claim 23, Spiegel teaches the device for deterring animals according to claim 1, comprising a detection element (see paragraph [0041] and [0042] where photoelectric switch is disclosed) for detecting persons and/or animals in the area of the device in an area close to the device, wherein the detection element (photoelectric switch 23; see paragraph [0041],[0042]) is configured for, at least temporarily, switching off the laser light source (13; paragraph [0040]) upon detection of a person and/or animal (see paragraph [0041]-[0042] where switching off the laser light source (13) is disclosed).
Regarding claim 24, Spiegel teaches the device for deterring animals according to claim 1, wherein the laser light source is movably and flexibly connected to the frame via the laser movement means (see [claim 13] where moving means for moving said source in a desired pattern of motion is disclosed).
Regarding claim 26, Spiegel teaches the device for deterring animals according to claim 1, wherein the frame movement means (29; paragraph [0046]) comprises the flexible connection element (spring; see paragraph [0046]), and comprises at least one or more springs (spring; see paragraph [0046]) for allowing the relative movement between the frame (upper surface 49 of the dock/support structure) and the mounting means (29).
Regarding claim 27, Spiegel teaches the device for deterring animals according to claim 1, wherein the frame comprises an opening or window (see figures 2, 3, and 7 where the laser has to be arranged in a housing which can be considered as a frame), through which the light beam (21; see figure 2) is directed, dimensioned to allow at least an angular variation of the light beam of 50° in all dimensions of the opening or window (see figure 2 where light beam 21 is emitting from frame).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Spiegel (US 2007/0188334 A1) in view of Navot et al. (US 2015/0379876 A1) as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Henskes et al. (WO 2014/185780 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Spiegel modified by Narvot et al. teaches the device for deterring animals according to claim 1, but Spiegel does not explicitly teach wherein the frame movement means comprises one or more wind catching elements for generating the movement by means of wind.
Henskes et al. (WO 2014/185780 A1) teaches a frame movement means comprising one or more wind catching elements (wind turbine 30 and blades 35) for generating the movement by means of wind.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify Spiegel to include wind catching elements as taught by Henskes et al. to protect the structures from birds by forming the envelope of a structure (see page 4, lines 5-9 of Henskes et al.).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-7, 9, 12-14, 17, 18, and 23-27 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection necessitated by applicant’s amendment of independent claim 1. Applicant amended claim 1 to include the limitation, “in at least a plane perpendicular to the average direction of the laser light beam”. A new reference, Navot et al. (US 2015/0379876 A1), teaches the newly recited limitation. Furter, Navot et al. teaches the recited randomized movements of claim 1.
Therefore, claim 1 is now rejected as obvious over Spiegel in view of Navot et al. (US 2015/0379876 A1). Claims 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 12-14, 17, 23, 24, 26 and 27 remain rejected based on dependency on a rejected base claim.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA MCMILLAN APENTENG whose telephone number is (571)272-5510. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 am-5:00 pm.
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, ABDULMAJEED AZIZ can be reached at 571-270-5046. 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.
/JESSICA M APENTENG/ Examiner, Art Unit 2875
/ABDULMAJEED AZIZ/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Prosecution Insights