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 .
Application Status
Claims 1, 5-10, 13, 15, 21-25, 29, 31, and 34-35 are pending and have been examined in this application.
As of the date of this action, no information disclosure statement has been filed on behalf of this case.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 04/22/2025 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 5-10, 13, 15, 21-25, 29, 31, and 34-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the phrase "debris" in line 19. This is a double inclusion of “debris” in line 18. The Examiner suggests changing “debris” to --the debris--. Claims 34-35 are rejected for similar reasons, regarding their respective recitations of “debris”.
Claims 5-10, 13, 15, 21-25, 29, 31 are rejected based on their respective dependencies.
Appropriate correction is required. Accordingly, the invention has been examined as best understood.
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.
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.
Claims 1 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Solano (U.S. Pub. 20180084763) in view of Baptistan et al. (U.S. Pub. 20220217957) and Daffunchio et al. (U.S. Pub. 20030056427).
In regard to claim 1, Solano discloses an insect feeding station comprising: a liquid food reservoir (Figs. 1-6 and Paragraph [0016], where there is an insect feeding station 100 with a liquid food reservoir 106); a liquid food storage tank connected to the reservoir for delivery of liquid food from the liquid food storage tank to the reservoir (Figs. 1-6 and Paragraph [0016], where there is a liquid food storage tank (source of inlet tube 102) connected to the reservoir 106 for delivery of liquid food from the liquid food storage tank (source of inlet tube 102) to the reservoir 106); the liquid food storage tank being connected to the liquid food reservoir by a liquid food supply system which is operable to deliver liquid food from the liquid food storage tank to the liquid food reservoir to maintain a constant supply of liquid food in the liquid food reservoir (Figs. 1-6 and Paragraphs [0016-0018], where the liquid food storage tank (source of inlet tube 102) is at least connected to the liquid food reservoir 106 by a liquid food supply system 102/103 which is operable to deliver liquid food from the liquid food storage tank (source of inlet tube 102) to the liquid food reservoir 106 to maintain a constant supply of liquid food in the liquid food reservoir (via liquid level valve 103)), the liquid food reservoir comprising at least one feeding channel having an access opening sufficiently narrow to prevent an insect falling into the feeding channel (Figs. 1-6 and Paragraph [0016], where there is a feeding channel 108 with an access opening narrow enough (see Fig. 3) to prevent an insect from falling into the feeding channel 108), and a landing pad is provided adjacent the access opening of the feeding channel (Fig, 3 and Paragraph [0017], where there is at least a landing pad (adjacent area near 108) providing a flat stable surface for the insect to stand on) wherein the liquid food reservoir comprises a feeding pool having a base with upstanding side walls (Figs. 1-6, where there is at least a feeding pool (liquid retaining portion of 106) having a base with upstanding side walls), a feeding plate mounted within the pool (Figs. 1-6, where there is a feeding plate 107), the feeding plate having a plurality of feeding channels for reception of liquid food (Figs. 1-6, where the feeding plate 107 at least has a plurality of feeding channels 108 for reception of liquid food). Solano is silent a scraper blade extends between opposite side walls of the feeding pool and engages a top surface of the feeding plate, the scraper blade having a drive assembly for movement of the scraper blade across the top surface of the feeding plate for cleaning the top surface of the feeding plate, the scraper blade being operable in use to deliver debris to a hatch leading to a chute for discharge of debris into a disposal tray. Baptistan et al. discloses a scraper blade extends between opposite side walls of the reservoir and engages a top surface of the plate, the scraper blade having a drive assembly for movement of the scraper blade across the top surface of the plate for cleaning the top surface of the plate, the scraper blade being operable in use to deliver debris to a hatch leading to a chute for discharge of debris into a disposal tray (Figs. 1-5 and Paragraphs [0040], [0097], [0104], [0106], and [0109], where there is scraper blade 1500/1503 extending between opposite side walls and drive assembly 1504-1508 for moving the scraper blade 1500/1503 across the top surface of the plate 1210 at least for cleaning the top surface of the plate 1210 by being operable in use to deliver debris (“as well as their waste, to a tray located just below in the stack”) to a hatch leading to a chute 1201 (an inverted “U”-shaped rim and open position of the movable wall) for discharge of debris (when “the movable wall transitions from the closed position to the open position”) into a tray below). Solano and Baptistan et al. are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which include insect farming devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device body of Solano such that a scraper blade extends between opposite side walls of the feeding pool and engages a top surface of the feeding plate, the scraper blade having a drive assembly for movement of the scraper blade across the top surface of the feeding plate for cleaning the top surface of the feeding plate, the scraper blade being operable in use to deliver debris to a hatch leading to a chute for discharge of debris into a disposal tray in view of Baptistan et al., since the scraper blade of Baptistan et al. could be used with the feeding plate of Solano. The motivation would have been to have an automated mechanism to move objects away from the plate surface. Thereby, the plate surface can be maintained in a relatively uncluttered state.
Solano is silent on a wasp feeding station. Daffunchio et al. discloses a wasp feeding station (Paragraph [0033] and Abstract, where there is at least a wasp feeding station). Solano and Daffunchio et al. are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which include feeding devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device body of Solano such that a wasp feeding station in view of Daffunchio et al. The motivation would have been to have a feeding device which is specifically used to feed wasps.
In regard to claim 15, Solano as modified by Baptistan et al. and Daffunchio et al. discloses the wasp feeding station as claimed in claim 1, wherein the reservoir has a level adjuster (Solano, Paragraph [0016], where the fluid line is kept at a suitable level by adjusting the regulating valve 103; Baptistan et al., Paragraph [0095], where the reservoir has a level adjuster 1202 to adjust the level of liquid in the cavity 1203).
Claims 5 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Solano (U.S. Pub. 20180084763) in view of Baptistan et al. (U.S. Pub. 20220217957) and Daffunchio et al. (U.S. Pub. 20030056427) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Bennett (U.S. Pub. 20150289497).
In regard to claim 5, Solano as modified by Baptistan et al. and Daffunchio et al. discloses the wasp feeding station as claimed in claim 1. Solano as modified by Baptistan et al. and Daffunchio et al. does not disclose the reservoir is mounted within a weather protection enclosure having at least one access port to allow through passage of insects to feed at the reservoir and to exit the weather protection enclosure. Bennett discloses the reservoir is mounted within a weather protection enclosure having at least one access port to allow through passage of insects to feed at the reservoir and to exit the weather protection enclosure (Figs. 3-4, where the reservoir is mounted within a weather protection enclosure 32/20 having at least one access port (openings covered by shutters 20) to allow through passage of insects 28 to feed at the reservoir and to exit the weather protection enclosure 32/20). Solano and Bennett are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which include insect devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device body of Solano as modified by Baptistan et al. and Daffunchio et al. such that the reservoir is mounted within a weather protection enclosure having at least one access port to allow through passage of insects to feed at the reservoir and to exit the weather protection enclosure in view of Bennett. The motivation would have been to have a cover on the reservoir and prevent wind or weather from effecting the contents of the reservoir (damaging functional components of the device).
In regard to claim 24, Solano as modified by Baptistan et al., Daffunchio et al., and Bennett discloses the wasp feeding station as claimed in claim 5, wherein the weather protection enclosure has a plurality of spaced-apart landing pads mounted at each access port (Bennett, Figs. 3-4, where there are at least a plurality of spaced-apart landing pads (portions under shutters 22) mounted at each access port).
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Solano (U.S. Pub. 20180084763) in view of Baptistan et al. (U.S. Pub. 20220217957), Daffunchio et al. (U.S. Pub. 20030056427), and Bennett (U.S. Pub. 20150289497) as applied to claim 5, and further in view of Graham (U.S. Pub. 20200085030).
In regard to claim 25, Solano as modified by Baptistan et al., Daffunchio et al., and Bennett discloses the wasp feeding station as claimed in claim 5. Solano as modified by Baptistan et al., Daffunchio et al., and Bennett does not disclose an infra-red counting gate is mounted at each access port. Graham discloses an infra-red counting gate is mounted at each access port (Paragraph [0056], where there is at least an infra-red counting gate mounted at each access port 152). Solano and Graham are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which include insect devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device body of Solano as modified by Baptistan et al., Daffunchio et al., and Bennett such that an infra-red counting gate is mounted at each access port in view of Graham. The motivation would have been to count the number of insects which enter and exit the device, in order to collect data for research or analytical purposes.
Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Solano (U.S. Pub. 20180084763) in view of Baptistan et al. (U.S. Pub. 20220217957) and Daffunchio et al. (U.S. Pub. 20030056427) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Beuthling (U.S. Pat. 4322862).
In regard to claim 6, Solano as modified by Baptistan et al. and Daffunchio et al. discloses the wasp feeding station as claimed in claim 1. Solano as modified by Baptistan et al. and Daffunchio et al. dose not disclose a temperature control system for regulating the temperature of the liquid food. Beuthling discloses a temperature control system for regulating the temperature of the liquid food (Column 3 lines 25-44, where there is a temperature control system 40/14 for regulating the temperature of the liquid food). Solano and Beuthling are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which include insect devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device body of Solano as modified by Baptistan et al. and Daffunchio et al. such that a temperature control system for regulating the temperature of the liquid food in view of Beuthling. The motivation would have been to maintain a temperature of the liquid within predetermined limits to keep the solution warm enough to project a signal of its availability to the insects in the vicinity and render the solution palatable to the insects.
In regard to claim 7, Solano as modified by Baptistan et al., Daffunchio et al., and Beuthling discloses the wasp feeding station as claimed in claim 6, wherein the temperature control system has heating apparatus and/or cooling apparatus for maintaining the liquid food within a desired temperature range (Beuthling, Column 3 lines 25-44, where the temperature control system has heating apparatus 14 for maintaining the liquid food within a desired temperature range).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Solano (U.S. Pub. 20180084763) in view of Baptistan et al. (U.S. Pub. 20220217957) and Daffunchio et al. (U.S. Pub. 20030056427) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Beuthling (U.S. Pat. 4322862) and Danon (U.S. Pub. 20150352470).
In regard to claim 13, Solano as modified by Baptistan et al. and Daffunchio et al. discloses the wasp feeding station as claimed in claim 1. Solano as modified by Baptistan et al. and Daffunchio et al. does not disclose a thermostat associated with the heating apparatus being operable to control operation of the heating apparatus to maintain the temperature of liquid food in the reservoir within a desired temperature range by heating the liquid food in the reservoir. Beuthling discloses a thermostat associated with the heating apparatus being operable to control operation of the heating apparatus to maintain the temperature of liquid food in the reservoir within a desired temperature range by heating the liquid food in the reservoir (Column 3 lines 25-44, where the temperature control system has a thermostat 40 and heating apparatus 14 for maintaining the liquid food within a desired temperature range). Solano and Beuthling are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which include insect devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device body of Solano as modified by Baptistan et al. and Daffunchio et al. such that a thermostat associated with the heating apparatus being operable to control operation of the heating apparatus to maintain the temperature of liquid food in the reservoir within a desired temperature range by heating the liquid food in the reservoir in view of Beuthling. The motivation would have been to maintain a temperature of the liquid within predetermined limits to keep the solution warm enough to project a signal of its availability to the insects in the vicinity and render the solution palatable to the insects.
Solano as modified by Baptistan et al. and Daffunchio et al. dose not disclose one or more thermal pads are mounted on the base of the reservoir, the thermal pads being operable to maintain the temperature of liquid food in the reservoir within a desired temperature range by heating or cooling the liquid food in the reservoir. Danon discloses one or more thermal pads are mounted on the base of the reservoir, the thermal pads being operable to maintain the temperature of liquid food in the reservoir within a desired temperature range by heating or cooling the liquid food in the reservoir (Fig. 1 and Paragraph [0065], where there are thermal heating pads provided on the outer walls of the storage tank 5 for heating liquid within the storage tank 5 to a desired temperature range). Solano and Danon are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which include liquid management devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device body of Solano as modified by Baptistan et al. and Daffunchio et al. such that one or more thermal pads are mounted on the base of the reservoir, the thermal pads being operable to maintain the temperature of liquid food in the reservoir within a desired temperature range by heating or cooling the liquid food in the reservoir in view of Danon. The motivation would have been to use an external heating mechanism that could ne repaired or replaced without having to take apart the entire device. Furthermore, using external thermal pads would lend to a more uniform warming of the liquid, when compared to a single immersion heater.
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Solano (U.S. Pub. 20180084763) in view of Baptistan et al. (U.S. Pub. 20220217957) and Daffunchio et al. (U.S. Pub. 20030056427) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Youn et al. (U.S. Pat. 11766026).
In regard to claim 8, Solano as modified by Baptistan et al. and Daffunchio et al. discloses the wasp feeding station as claimed in claim 1. Solano as modified by Baptistan et al. and Daffunchio et al. does not disclose a sterilizer is mounted within the liquid food storage tank for sanitising liquid food therein. Youn et al. discloses a sterilizer is mounted within the liquid food storage tank for sanitising liquid food therein (Column 4 lines 9-16, where there is at least a sterilizer 194 is mounted within the liquid food storage tank 200 for sanitizing liquid food). Solano and Youn et al. are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which include liquid management devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device body of Solano as modified by Baptistan et al. and Daffunchio et al. such that a sterilizer is mounted within the liquid food storage tank for sanitising liquid food therein in view of Youn et al. The motivation would have been to use a UV light source to sterilize the liquid food and prevent the spread or growth of bacteria via the liquid food.
In regard to claim 9, Solano as modified by Baptistan et al., Daffunchio et al., and Youn et al. discloses the wasp feeding station as claimed in claim 8, wherein the sterilizer comprises a UV light source (Youn et al., Column 4 lines 9-16, where the sterilizer 194 comprises a UV light source).
Claims 10, 21, 23, 29, and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Solano (U.S. Pub. 20180084763) in view of Baptistan et al. (U.S. Pub. 20220217957) and Daffunchio et al. (U.S. Pub. 20030056427) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Russo (U.S. Pub. 20180118340).
In regard to claim 10, Solano as modified by Baptistan et al. and Daffunchio et al. discloses the wasp feeding station as claimed in claim 1. Solano as modified by Baptistan et al. and Daffunchio et al. does not disclose an additive dosing tank is connected to the liquid food storage tank for delivery of additives into the liquid food. Russo discloses an additive dosing tank is connected to the liquid food storage tank for delivery of additives into the liquid food (Fig. 2, where there are feed ingredients and additive medications at least connected to the liquid food storage tank 35). Solano and Russo are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which include insect care devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device body of Solano as modified by Baptistan et al. and Daffunchio et al. such that an additive dosing tank is connected to the liquid food storage tank for delivery of additives into the liquid food in view of Russo. The motivation would have been to enable nutrients and medication to be added into the food solution.
In regard to claim 21, Solano as modified by Baptistan et al. and Daffunchio et al. discloses the wasp feeding station as claimed in claim 1. Solano as modified by Baptistan et al. and Daffunchio et al. does not disclose the liquid food storage tank has a mixer for mixing liquid food stored in the storage tank. Russo discloses the liquid food storage tank has a mixer for mixing liquid food stored in the storage tank (Fig. 2, where there is a mixer 32 for at least mixing liquid food stored in the storage tank 35). Solano and Russo are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which include insect care devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device body of Solano as modified by Baptistan et al. and Daffunchio et al. such that the liquid food storage tank has a mixer for mixing liquid food stored in the storage tank in view of Russo. The motivation would have been to allow nutrients and medication to be mixed in uniformly with the food solution.
In regard to claim 23, Solano as modified by Baptistan et al. and Daffunchio et al. discloses the wasp feeding station as claimed in claim 1. Solano as modified by Baptistan et al. and Daffunchio et al. does not disclose a feed transfer pump has a feed transfer pump inlet connected to an outlet of the storage tank and a feed transfer pump outlet connected to an inlet of the reservoir. Russo discloses a feed transfer pump has a feed transfer pump inlet connected to an outlet of the storage tank and a feed transfer pump outlet connected to an inlet of the reservoir (Fig. 2, where there is a feed transfer pump 38 that at least has a feed transfer pump inlet connected to an outlet of the storage tank 35 and a feed transfer pump outlet connected to an inlet of the reservoir 23). Solano and Russo are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which include insect care devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device body of Solano as modified by Baptistan et al. and Daffunchio et al. such that a feed transfer pump has a feed transfer pump inlet connected to an outlet of the storage tank and a feed transfer pump outlet connected to an inlet of the reservoir in view of Russo. The motivation would have been to control the movement of the liquid feed solution from the storage tank to the feeding reservoir.
In regard to claim 29, Solano as modified by Baptistan et al. and Daffunchio et al. discloses the wasp feeding station as claimed in claim 1. Solano as modified by Baptistan et al. and Daffunchio et al. does not disclose monitoring and communication equipment to enable remote monitoring of the wasp feeding station. Russo discloses monitoring and communication equipment to enable remote monitoring of the feeding station (Paragraphs [0029], [0034], [0034], and [0050] where there is at least monitoring and communication equipment (wireless transmission) to enable remote monitoring of the feeding station). Solano and Russo are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which include insect care devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device body of Solano as modified by Baptistan et al. and Daffunchio et al. such that monitoring and communication equipment to enable remote monitoring of the wasp feeding station in view of Russo. The motivation would have been to remotely control the operations of the device and remotely collect data regarding the device.
In regard to claim 31, Solano as modified by Baptistan et al., Daffunchio et al., and Russo discloses the wasp feeding station as claimed in claim 29, wherein the monitoring and communication equipment includes one or more of cameras, lights, weather station, wireless connectivity and GPS (Russo, Paragraphs [0029], [0034], [0034], and [0050] where the monitoring and communication equipment at least includes wireless connectivity).
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Solano (U.S. Pub. 20180084763) in view of Baptistan et al. (U.S. Pub. 20220217957), Daffunchio et al. (U.S. Pub. 20030056427), and Russo (U.S. Pub. 20180118340) as applied to claim 21, and further in view of Leo (U.S. Pub. 20170311612).
In regard to claim 22, Solano as modified by Baptistan et al., Daffunchio et al., and Russo discloses the wasp feeding station as claimed in claim 21. Solano as modified by Baptistan et al., Daffunchio et al., and Russo does the disclose the mixer comprises a mixer pump mounted in a recirculating pipeline, the mixer pump having a mixer pump inlet connected to a storage tank outlet and a mixer pump outlet connected to a storage tank inlet. Leo discloses the mixer comprises a mixer pump mounted in a recirculating pipeline, the mixer pump having a mixer pump inlet connected to a storage tank outlet and a mixer pump outlet connected to a storage tank inlet (Fig. 14H and Paragraph [0538-0539], where there is a recirculation pipeline which is at least connected to a mixer pump H40 and a storage tank H26). Solano and Leo are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which include insect devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device body of Solano as modified by Baptistan et al., Daffunchio et al., and Russo such that the disclose the mixer comprises a mixer pump mounted in a recirculating pipeline, the mixer pump having a mixer pump inlet connected to a storage tank outlet and a mixer pump outlet connected to a storage tank inlet in view of Leo. The motivation would have been to allow for the liquid to be pumped out of the storage tank and through a filter mechanism to maintain consistency of the solution and produce a predictable liquid.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 34-35 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments (filed 04/22/2025) with respect to the rejection of the claims have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Solano (U.S. Pub. 20180084763) in view of Baptistan et al. (U.S. Pub. 20220217957) and Daffunchio et al. (U.S. Pub. 20030056427) discloses the applicant’s claim 1, as specified under Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 above.
Specifically, Baptistan et al. teaches a scraper blade extends between opposite side walls of the reservoir and engages a top surface of the plate, the scraper blade having a drive assembly for movement of the scraper blade across the top surface of the plate for cleaning the top surface of the plate, the scraper blade being operable in use to deliver debris to a hatch leading to a chute for discharge of debris into a disposal tray in Figs. 1-5 and Paragraphs [0040], [0097], [0104], [0106], and [0109], where there is scraper blade 1500/1503 extending between opposite side walls and drive assembly 1504-1508 for moving the scraper blade 1500/1503 across the top surface of the plate 1210 at least for cleaning the top surface of the plate 1210 by being operable in use to deliver debris (“as well as their waste, to a tray located just below in the stack”) to a hatch leading to a chute 1201 (an inverted “U”-shaped rim and open position of the movable wall) for discharge of debris (when “the movable wall transitions from the closed position to the open position”) into a tray below.
Furthermore, as stated previously, paragraph [0016] and Fig. 1 of Solano teaches the handle 101 is at least “detachably attached to the sheet 107”. The handle is not required and the device would perform equally as well with the handle detached. Furthermore, the valve 103 of Solano is at the edge of the feeding plate “sheet 107” and would not necessarily obstruct the movement of the scraper blade of Baptistan et al. Any theorized “build-up” of debris at a side of the feeding plate near valve 103, is at most inconvenient and would not prevent the scraper blade of Baptistan et al. from moving across the surface. The combination of Solano and Baptistan et al. does not prevent function of the device, and is therefore deemed to be proper. Furthermore, the motivation, to have an automated mechanism to move objects away from the plate surface to maintain the plate surface in a relatively uncluttered state, allows for a device which requires less manual intervention or cleaning. The option to remove and clean the “sheet 107” of Solano does not teach away from the combination of Solano and Baptistan et al.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Particularly the references were cited because they pertain to the state of the art of insect related devices.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN M DENNIS whose telephone number is (571)270-7604. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 7:30 am to 4:30 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, Kimberly Berona can be reached on (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.
/KEVIN M DENNIS/Examiner, Art Unit 3647