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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 06/03/2026 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.
Claims 16, 21, 36-37, 39, 42-44, and 46-47 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lolley (US 10,842,138) in view of Van Decker (US 7,096,885).
In re. claim 16, Lolley teaches an insect dispensing system, comprising:a first section comprising a first inlet and a first outlet (first section of feeding tube (7) upstream of divider) (fig. 1); a divider connected to the first outlet defining two or more divider outlets (first feeding tube divided into two separate feeding tubes at divider) (fig. 1); a plurality of catch basins (shelves (1)), each catch basin supporting a strainer (3), each strainer comprising a mesh, each mesh sized to strain insect larvae and insect pupae from liquid introduced at the first inlet for retention for dispensing a population of insect larvae or insect pupae (wire mesh screen supports the larvae colony) (col. 2, ln. 11-13); and a plurality of second sections, each second section comprising a second inlet and a second outlet (second feeding tubes (7) downstream of divider) (fig. 1), each second inlet connected to a respective divider outlet (fig. 1), wherein each of the plurality of second outlets is configured to drain the liquid introduced at the first inlet into a respective catch basin of the plurality of catch basins (fig. 1).
Lolley fails to disclose the first outlet defining three or more divider outlets.
Van Decker teaches the first outlet defining three or more divider outlets (116, 128, 132, 132) (fig. 3).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Lolley to incorporate the teachings of Van Decker to have the first outlet defining three or more divider outlets, for the predictable result of providing feed evenly to additional containers.
In re. claim 21, Lolley as modified by Van Decker (see Van Decker) teach the insect dispensing system of claim 20, wherein the plurality of second outlets output a plurality of individual streams of fluid (in units (134)) (fig. 3) to distribute the population of insect larvae or insect pupae among the plurality of catch basins when the population of insect larvae or insect pupae and the fluid flow from the first inlet towards the plurality of divider outlets (equivalent structure provides equivalent function).
In re. claim 36, Lolley as modified by Van Decker (see Van Decker) teach the insect dispensing system of claim 16, further comprising: for a third outlet (130) of the plurality of second outlets: a second divider (132) comprising one or more second divider outlets (fig. 3), each second divider outlet having a first end in fluid communication with the third outlet (fig. 3) and a second end in fluid communication with a first catch basin (modified structure would have the outlet in fluid communication with the catch basin of Lolley).
In re. claim 37, Lolley as modified by Van Decker (see Lolley) teach the insect dispensing system of claim 16, wherein the plurality of second outlets are separated from the respective plurality of catch basins by an air gap (fig. 1).
In re. claim 39, Lolley as modified by Van Decker (see Lolley) teach the insect dispensing system of claim 16, wherein at least one catch basin of the plurality of catch basins comprises a substantially rectangular box having four sloping walls and an open top configured to receive the liquid introduced at the first inlet (col. 6, ln. 45-51).
In re. claim 42, Lolley as modified by Van Decker (see Lolley) teach the insect dispensing system of claim 16, wherein each strainer supported by a catch basin is removable from the respective catch basin (trays (2) can be removed from shelf (1)) (col. 2, ln. 32-34).
In re. claim 43, Lolley as modified by Van Decker (see Lolley) teach the insect dispensing system of claim 16, wherein the plurality of second outlets are positionable to drain the liquid introduced at the first inlet into the respective plurality of catch basins (fig. 1).
In re. claim 44, Lolley as modified by Van Decker (see Van Decker) teach the insect dispensing system of claim 16, wherein the divider comprises nine divider outlets (seven dividers create 14 outlets) (fig. 3).
In re. claim 46, Lolley as modified by Van Decker (see Lolley) teach the insect dispensing system of claim 16, wherein each mesh is formed from a from a rigid material and has a fixed shape (col. 8, ln. 20-24).
In re. claim 47, Lolley as modified by Van Decker (see Lolley) teach the insect dispensing system of claim 16, wherein the liquid is water (col. 8, ln. 50-54).
Claims 18-20 and 45 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lolley as modified by Van Decker as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Harrod, Jr. et al. (US 3,223,237), hereinafter Harrod.
In re. claim 18, Lolley as modified by Van Decker fail to disclose the first inlet comprises a funnel.
Harrod teaches a first inlet (17) comprises a funnel (16).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Lolley as modified by Van Decker to incorporate the teachings of Harrod to have the first inlet comprise a funnel, for the predictable result of adding more feed to the system at the same time.
In re. claim 19, Lolley as modified by Van Decker fail to disclose a fluid source and an insect source, wherein the first inlet is in fluid communication with the fluid source and the insect source.
Harrod teaches a fluid source (24) and an insect source (22), wherein the first inlet (17) is in fluid communication with the fluid source and the insect source (fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Lolley as modified by Van Decker to incorporate the teachings of Harrod to have the first inlet comprise a funnel, for the predictable result of distributing the larvae colony to the trays via the fluid source.
In re. claim 20, Lolley as modified by Van Decker and Harrod (see Harrod) teach the insect dispensing system of claim 19, wherein the fluid source comprises an inlet port (23) to introduce fluid into the first inlet (17), and wherein the insect source further comprises a funnel (16) for introducing the population of insect larvae or insect pupae into the fluid (fig. 1).
In re. claim 45, Lolley as modified by Van Decker fail to disclose the population of insect larvae or insect pupae comprise mosquito larvae or pupae.
Harrod teaches the population of insect larvae or insect pupae comprise mosquito larvae or pupae (col. 2, ln. 70-71).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Lolley as modified by Van Decker to incorporate the teachings of Harrod to have the population of insect larvae or insect pupae comprise mosquito larvae or pupae, for the purpose of applying the teachings of the invention to additional insect cultivating fields.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims above have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Christopher D. Hutchens whose telephone number is (571)270-5535. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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.
/C.D.H./
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3647
/Christopher D Hutchens/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3647
Prosecution Insights