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. Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Israel on 4/2/23 . It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the IL301885 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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 , 7-9 , 11-1 3, and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Qi, U.S. Patent No. 8939481 B1 . Regarding claim s 1 , 13, 17 , the method described in these claims would inherently result from the use of device of Qi ‘481 as advanced above. Qi ‘481 discloses a device 101 for collecting dog waste comprising: a grip handle 105, a rod 103 with a proximal portion of the rod attached to the grip handle 105, a claw (127, 129) attached to distal portion of the rod, wherein the claw is configured to be open and closed responsive to activation of a trigger mechanism 109 (i.e. a mechanical, claim 17 ) positioned on the grip handle 105 and to close the claw (127, 129) for sealing and disposing the dog waste using a dog wase collection bag ( claim s 13 ) , see figures 1-13. Regarding claims 7-9 , and 18-19 , as stated above, Qi ‘481 discloses a bag dispenser 147 is configured to dispense a dog waste collection bag 501 which is made from a plastic bag (i.e., which inherently has properties of nylon, polypropylene, or polyethylene), see figure s 1-13. Regarding claims 11-12, as stated above, Qi ‘481 discloses the grip handle 105 further comprises a retractable leash device 1001 for attaching to a collar of a dog (i.e., intended use), see figures 1-13. 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. Claim s 2 , 10 , 14, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qi, U.S. Patent No. 8939481 B1, in view of Times-Dudley, U.S. Patent No. 10709112 B1 . Regarding claim s 2 and 14 , as stated above, Qi ‘481 shows the concept of inserting two rods (903, 905) into a sleeve body 145 as a locking means (143, claim s 10 and 20 ) , see figure 9A-B. Times-Dudley ‘112 discloses a telescopic shaft assembly 20 for a device for collecting dog waste, see figures 1-3. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the apparatus of Qi to include a telescopic feature to the rod as suggested by Times-Dudley, in order for a quick adjustment length of the device. Furthermore, since all of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qi, U.S. Patent No. 8939481 B1, in view of McCormick, U.S. Patent No. 10801171 B1 . Regarding claim 3, as stated above, Qi ‘481 shows the claw (127, 129) includes a shovel blade (on the 129 side) rather than both blades , see figure s 1-2 . McCormick ‘171 discloses the claw (110, 112) includes shovel blades , see figures 1-3. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the apparatus of Qi to include both shovel blades as suggested by McCormick ‘171 , in order to pick up a dog waste equally from both ends . Furthermore, since all of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 4-6 , and 15-16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The claims 4-6, and 15-16 are patentable over the prior art of record because the teachings of the references taken as a whole do not show or render obvious the combination set forth in claims 4-6, and 15-16 , including every structural element recited in the claim . None of the references of the prior art teach or suggest the elements of the device as advanced above and such do not provide the necessary motivation, absent applicant's specification, for modifying the device in the manner required by the claims. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT SANG K KIM whose telephone number is 571-272-6947. The examiner can normally be reached Tuesday through Thursday from 10:30 A.M. to 9 P.M or Tuesday through Thursday from 10:30 A.M. to 7 P.M. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Robert Hodge, can be reached on (571) 272-2097. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). SK 3/4/26 /SANG K KIM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3654