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 .
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, 3-11, and 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kitiashvili (US Patent No. 7,287,790) in view of Fulbrook (US Pub. No. 2019/0338480) and Weston (US Patent No. 11,470,819).
Regarding claim 1, the Kitiashvili reference discloses an animal waste scooper (Fig. 1A), comprising:
a loop member (15) having a rim (14) and an open central area (opening of 15) configured to receive a bag therethrough (Col. 3, Lines 18-34);
a handle (3) extending from the loop member, wherein the loop member and the handle member are disposed on a same plane (Fig. 1A).
However, the Kitiashvili reference fails to explicitly disclose a bag roll holder forming a bag roll opening on the handle, wherein the bag roll holder is configured to receive a bag roll to rotatably dispense bags from within the bag roll opening;
a tapered aperture disposed on the handle configured to receive a knot of the bag therethrough and support the bag hands-free;
wherein the bag roll holder is disposed between the tapered aperture and the loop member.
The Fulbrook reference, a scooper, discloses the addition of a bag roll holder (50) that is adjustably placed on the scooper.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide a bag roll holder to the Kitiashvili reference in view of the Fulbrook reference in order to allow for easy carrying of a bag roll.
The Weston reference, a scooper, discloses the addition of differently shaped bag holders (Fig. 56).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide a tapered aperture to receive a knot of the bag in the Kitiashvili reference in view of the teachings of the Weston reference in order to allow for hands free transport of waste filled bags.
Regarding claim 3, the Kitiashvili reference, as modified in claim 1, discloses the tapered aperture comprises a keyhole shape having a slot extending from an opening of the tapered aperture (Weston, Fig. 56).
Regarding claim 4, the Kitiashvili reference, as modified in claim 3, discloses the opening of the tapered aperture comprises a larger width than a width of the slot (Weston, Fig. 56).
Regarding claim 5, the modified Kitiashvili reference discloses the invention substantially as claimed in claim 4.
However, the modified Kitiashvili reference fails to explicitly disclose lateral sides of the slot are parallel to lateral sides of the handle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to make the lateral sides of the slot be parallel, a change in the shape of a prior art device is a design consideration within the skill of the art and in order to prevent accidental ripping of the waste bag. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
Regarding claim 6, the Kitiashvili reference, as modified in claim 5, discloses the slot is disposed between the opening of the tapered aperture and the loop member (Weston, Figs. 56-59; note if the opening is lower, then the bag will not hold).
Regarding claim 7, the Kitiashvili reference, as modified in claim 1, discloses the open central area of the loop member comprises a semi-circular shape (Kitiashvili, Fig. 1A).
Regarding claim 8, the Kitiashvili reference, as modified in claim 1, discloses the handle is rigid (Kitiashvili, Fig. 1A).
Regarding claim 9, the modified Kitiashvili reference discloses the invention substantially as claimed in claim 1.
However, the Kitiashvili reference fails to explicitly disclose a depressed thumb area disposed between the bag roll holder and the tapered aperture, wherein the depressed thumb area is configured to receive a fingertip (Kitiashvili, e.g. aperture holding button 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to make the button have a depressed thumb area, a change in the shape of a prior art device is a design consideration within the skill of the art and in order to provide a more ergonomic button. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
Regarding claims 10 and 11, the modified Kitiashvili reference discloses the invention substantially as claimed in claim 7.
However, the Kitiashvili reference fails to explicitly disclose a depressed thumb area disposed between the bag roll holder and the tapered aperture, wherein the depressed thumb area is configured to receive a fingertip and comprising a smooth, concave surface.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to make the button have a depressed thumb area, a change in the shape of a prior art device is a design consideration within the skill of the art and in order to provide a more ergonomic button. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
The methods of claims 16-20 are obvious in view of the rejections of claims 1, 3-11, and 16-20.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kitiashvili in view of Fulbrook and Weston (US Patent No. 11,470,819) as applied to claim 1 and 3-20 above, and further in view of Kelly et al. (US Patent No. 10,655,289).
Regarding claim 2, the modified Kitiashvili reference discloses the invention substantially as claimed in claim 1.
However, the modified Kitiashvili reference fails to explicitly disclose a strap extending from a distal end of the handle.
The Kelly et al. (hereinafter Kelly) reference, a waste collection device, discloses the addition of a strap (41).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide a strap to the modified Kitiashvili reference in view of the teachings of the Kelly reference in order to allow for easy carrying of the scooper.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12-15 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GILBERT Y LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-5894. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-430pm.
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, Christine Mills can be reached at (571)272-8322. 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.
/GILBERT Y LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Prosecution Insights