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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the second housing, second sensor, second antenna, or other component, as well as the second housing being coupled to the first housing must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 26, 30-31, 33, 38, 41, 45, and 48 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sanchez (US 2017/0105389) (cited by applicant in IDS dated 11/29/23) in view of Wang (KR 2020/0026443) (cited by applicant in IDS dated 7/7/26).
Regarding Claim 26, Sanchez discloses a pet amusement device (pet toy; Paragraph [0025]), comprising:
at least one housing (toy body; Paragraph [0025]) comprising, at least in part:
a memory (data storage device; Paragraph [0034]);
a transceiver (input detection device Paragraph [0025]; transceiver Paragraph [0027]);
at least one sensor (input detection device; Paragraph [0025]; pressure sensor Paragraph [0029]), the at least one sensor configured to detect one or more parameters corresponding to at least one pet interaction with the device (Paragraph [0029]);
at least one haptic motor configured to generate at least some vibration through the at least one housing (vibration motor Paragraph [0028]; “The vibration motor is able to vibrate the electronic toy in response to the interactive input. The vibration motor is actuated as the interactive output during step (G), allowing the electronic toy to vibrate.” Paragraph [0031]); and
a processor (control unit Paragraph [0025]), the processor configured at least to:
receive the one or more parameters (“A control unit is also provided and is communicably coupled to the input detection device and to the interactive output device, enabling communications between the control unit, the input detection device, and the interactive output device (Step B).” Paragraph [0025]);
transmit one or more signals corresponding to data to one or more remote servers (notification to computing device; Paragraph [0026; Figure 4);
control the at least some vibration based on a command from the one or more remote servers (“This allows a user to manually provide the interactive input in order to trigger the interactive output from the electronic toy.” Paragraph [0027]).
Sanchez fails to disclose a power source; the processor configured at least to: generate data corresponding to the one or more parameters; transmit one or more signals corresponding to the data to one or more remote servers; control the at least some vibration based on a command from the one or more remote servers based on an occurrence of a predetermined condition.
However, Wang teaches a dog toy, comprising a power source (“the motor 420 may perform a rotational movement to transfer power generated by the battery of the animal toy 1000 or the external battery to the wheels.” Page 5 Paragraph 7); wherein the processor is configured at least to: receive the one or more parameters; generate data corresponding to the one or more parameters (“the controller 100 according to an embodiment of the present disclosure may determine at least one of an animal's emotion and state by analyzing the animal's crying sound input through the microphone 310… The animal toy 1000 may have a built-in microphone 310 of the sound input and output unit 300. The voice data of the animal, which is input through the microphone 310, may be recorded to generate input voice data.” Page 4 Paragraph 5 of translation; “Accordingly, the controller 100 generates a variable and similarity function of frequency characteristics according to the input voice data (for example, the animal's cry), and then analyzes the input voice data to be input to determine whether the pet is crying.” Page 4 Paragraph 6 of translation); transmit one or more signals corresponding to the data to one or more remote servers (“the controller 100 may determine the state and emotion (anxiety, happiness, loneliness, sadness, etc.) of the analyzed animal and determine to transmit the pet state information to the user terminal 2000” Page 4 Paragraph 7 of translation); control the at least some stimulation based on a command from the one or more remote servers based on an occurrence of a predetermined condition (“ the network unit 200 may receive a user input for performing feedback (for example, moving to a feed container, outputting predetermined output voice data, etc.) of pet status information through the user terminal 2000. have. Therefore, the controller 100 may provide feedback based on the pet's state and emotion by driving the animal toy 1000 according to a user input.” Page 4 Paragraph 7 of translation).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the amusement device of Sanchez, with the battery of Wang with reasonable expectation of success, in order to allow for greater freedom of movement of the device without corded attachments and to have provided the control unit and vibration motor of Sanchez, with the data generation and the remote server controlling the stimulation as taught by Wang, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to allow for more specific and accurate training of the pet, since it is well known to use remote servers for receiving data on a pet to train against specific behaviors.
Regarding Claim 30, Sanchez as modified teaches the device of 26.
Sanchez fails to disclose the device, wherein the at least one housing comprises at least one of: a water-resistant rubber, silicon, or soft plastic.
However, Wang teaches a pet toy wherein the at least one housing comprises at least one of: a water-resistant rubber (“the animal toy 1000 may be made of a material having elasticity (eg, natural rubber)” Page 6 Paragraph 2 of translation; natural rubber is water resistant), silicon, or soft plastic.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the housing of Sanchez, to be natural rubber as taught by Wang, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to help protect the electronics from damage from the pet, and help increase the length of life of the device.
Regarding Claim 31, Sanchez as modified teaches the device of 26. Sanchez further discloses the device, wherein the at least one sensor comprises at least a pressure or force sensor (pressure sensor Paragraph [0029]).
Regarding Claim 33, Sanchez as modified teaches the device of 26. Sanchez further discloses the device, wherein the at least one pet interaction comprises at least one of: play with the device (“the notification may be sent in the form of a push notification to the computing device and notifies a user that a pet is playing with the electronic toy.” Paragraph [0026]), a breathing on the device, a proximity to the device, a vocalization proximate to the device, a contact with the device, or one or more bites on the device (Paragraph [0029]).
Regarding Claim 38, Sanchez discloses a method of operating a pet amusement device (pet toy; Paragraph [0025]), the device comprising:
at least one housing (toy body; Paragraph [0025]) comprising, at least in part:
a memory (data storage device; Paragraph [0034]);
a transceiver (input detection device Paragraph [0025]; transceiver Paragraph [0027]);
a processor (control unit Paragraph [0025]);
at least one sensor (input detection device; Paragraph [0025]; pressure sensor Paragraph [0029]); and
at least one haptic motor configured to generate at least some vibration through the at least one housing (vibration motor Paragraph [0028]; “The vibration motor is able to vibrate the electronic toy in response to the interactive input. The vibration motor is actuated as the interactive output during step (G), allowing the electronic toy to vibrate.” Paragraph [0031]);
the method comprising:
detecting, via the at least one sensor, one or more parameters corresponding to at least one pet interaction with the device (Paragraph [0029]);
receiving, by the processor, the one or more parameters (“A control unit is also provided and is communicably coupled to the input detection device and to the interactive output device, enabling communications between the control unit, the input detection device, and the interactive output device (Step B).” Paragraph [0025]);
transmitting, via the transceiver, one or more signals corresponding to parameters to one or more remote servers (notification to computing device; Paragraph [0026; Figure 4); and
controlling the at least some vibration based on a command from the one or more remote servers (“This allows a user to manually provide the interactive input in order to trigger the interactive output from the electronic toy.” Paragraph [0027])
Sanchez fails to disclose a power source; generating, by the processor, the data corresponding to the one or more parameters; transmitting, via the transceiver, one or more signals corresponding to the data to one or more remote servers.
However, Wang teaches a pet training method comprising a power source (“the motor 420 may perform a rotational movement to transfer power generated by the battery of the animal toy 1000 or the external battery to the wheels.” Page 5 Paragraph 7); receiving by the processor the one or more parameters and generating, by the processor, the data corresponding to the one or more parameters (“the controller 100 according to an embodiment of the present disclosure may determine at least one of an animal's emotion and state by analyzing the animal's crying sound input through the microphone 310… The animal toy 1000 may have a built-in microphone 310 of the sound input and output unit 300. The voice data of the animal, which is input through the microphone 310, may be recorded to generate input voice data.” Page 4 Paragraph 5 of translation; “Accordingly, the controller 100 generates a variable and similarity function of frequency characteristics according to the input voice data (for example, the animal's cry), and then analyzes the input voice data to be input to determine whether the pet is crying.” Page 4 Paragraph 6 of translation);generating, by the processor, the data corresponding to the one or more parameters; transmitting, via the transceiver, one or more signals corresponding to the data to one or more remote servers (“the controller 100 may determine the state and emotion (anxiety, happiness, loneliness, sadness, etc.) of the analyzed animal and determine to transmit the pet state information to the user terminal 2000” Page 4 Paragraph 7 of translation); and controlling the at least some vibration based on at least one of: an occurrence of a predetermined condition, or a command from the one or more remote servers (“ the network unit 200 may receive a user input for performing feedback (for example, moving to a feed container, outputting predetermined output voice data, etc.) of pet status information through the user terminal 2000. have. Therefore, the controller 100 may provide feedback based on the pet's state and emotion by driving the animal toy 1000 according to a user input.” Page 4 Paragraph 7 of translation).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the amusement device of Sanchez, with the battery of Wang with reasonable expectation of success, in order to allow for greater freedom of movement of the device without corded attachments and to have provided the control unit and vibration motor of Sanchez, with the data generation and the remote server controlling the stimulation as taught by Wang, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to allow for more specific and accurate training of the pet, since it is well known to use remote servers for receiving data on a pet to train against specific behaviors.
Regarding Claim 41, Sanchez as modified teaches the method of 38. Sanchez further discloses the method, wherein the at least one pet interaction comprises at least one of: play with the device (“the notification may be sent in the form of a push notification to the computing device and notifies a user that a pet is playing with the electronic toy.” Paragraph [0026]), a breathing on the device, a proximity to the device, a vocalization proximate to the device, a contact with the device, or one or more bites on the device (Paragraph [0029]).
Regarding Claim 45, Sanchez as modified teaches the method of 38. Sanchez further discloses the method, further comprising wirelessly transmitting, via the transceiver, parameters to the one or more remote servers (transceiver Figure 7; Paragraph [0027]).
Sanchez fails to disclose the method, further comprising wirelessly transmitting the data to the one or more remote servers.
However, Wang teaches further comprising wirelessly transmitting, via a transmitter, the data to the one or more remote servers (“the controller 100 may determine the state and emotion (anxiety, happiness, loneliness, sadness, etc.) of the analyzed animal and determine to transmit the pet state information to the user terminal 2000” Page 4 Paragraph 7 of translation; “the animal toy 1000 may be connected to a network such as Ethernet or Wi-Fi for connecting to the IoT of wired or wireless.” Page 3 last Paragraph of translation).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the control unit and transceiver of Sanchez, with the data generation and transmission as taught by Wang, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to allow for more specific and accurate training of the pet, since it is well known to use controllers for getting data on a pet to train against specific behaviors
Regarding Claim 48, Sanchez as modified teaches the method of 38. Sanchez further discloses the method, wherein the at least one sensor comprises at least a pressure or force sensor (pressure sensor Paragraph [0029]), the method further comprising: detecting, via the pressure or force sensor, one or more bite interactions by the pet with the device (“The interactive input may vary and includes interactions such as bites and movements.” Paragraph [0026]; Paragraph [0029]).
Claims 32 and 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sanchez in view of Wang as applied to claim 26 above, and further in view of Mott et al. (US 2022/0151207).
Regarding Claim 32, Sanchez as modified teaches the device of 26.
Sanchez fails to disclose the device, wherein the at least one housing further comprises at least one of: a clock, a Wi-Fi antenna, a cellular antenna, or a Bluetooth antenna.
However, Mott teaches a pet training device, wherein the at least one housing further comprises at least one of: a clock, a Wi-Fi antenna, a cellular antenna, or a Bluetooth antenna (Paragraph [0108]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the housing of Sanchez, with the Bluetooth antenna of Mott, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to allow for faster communication without the use of wires or cords.
Regarding Claim 37, Sanchez as modified teaches the device of 26.
Sanchez fails to disclose the device, further comprising at least one of: at least one charging port operably coupled to the power source; or at least one data port operably coupled to the processor.
However, Mott teaches a pet training device further comprising at least one of: at least one charging port operably coupled to the power source (“Device 300 can also include a charging port, which can be used to charge the battery. The charging port can be, for example, a type-A universal serial bus (“USB”) port, a type-B USB port, a mini-USB port, a micro-USB port, or any other type of port.” Paragraph [0056]); or at least one data port operably coupled to the processor.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the device of Sanchez, with the charging port of Mott, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to allow for more reliable communication between devices.
Claims 36 and 51 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sanchez in view of Wang as applied to claim 26 above, and further in view of Couse (US 2014/0267299) (cited by applicant in IDS dated 7/25/23).
Regarding Claim 36, Sanchez as modified teaches the device of 26. Sanchez further discloses the device, wherein the at least one housing is a first housing, the device further comprising: a second housing (“the pressure sensor may be embedded into a removable and flexible shell that is attached to the toy body.” Paragraph [0029]), the second housing configured to couple to the first housing (Paragraph [0029]).
Sanchez fails to explicitly disclose the second housing comprising at least one of: a second sensor that is different from the at least one sensor and an antenna that is different from any antenna in the first housing.
However, Couse teaches a pet analysis device wherein the second housing comprising at least one of: a second sensor (“may further include external sensors (e.g., sensors external to the wearable device 101) which interact with or otherwise supplement the sensors of the wearable device 101. In some embodiments, these external sensors may include detachable analog/digital items such as a stethoscope, ultrasound sensor, infrared temperature sensor… and filters/attachments to enhance/collaborate the existing set of sensors” Paragraph [0081]) that is different from the at least one sensor and an antenna that is different from any antenna in the first housing (“a reading of high acceleration from the accelerometer may be supplemented with a reading from, e.g., a light meter and or a microphone on wearable device 101 (as two examples of internal sensors)” Paragraph [0117]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the second housing of Sanchez, with the removable differing sensors of Couse, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to allow the user to customize the device to suit the needs or wants of specific animals.
Regarding Claim 51, Sanchez as modified teaches the device of 36. Sanchez further discloses the device, wherein the second housing is configured to modify one or more of a size, shape and texture of the pet amusement device when coupled to the first housing (“the pressure sensor may be embedded into a removable and flexible shell that is attached to the toy body.” Paragraph [0029] a shell would change the size of the device).
Claim 44 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sanchez in view of Wang as applied to claim 38 above, and further in view of Chamberlain (GB 2492110).
Regarding Claim 44, Sanchez as modified teaches the method of 38.
Sanchez fails to disclose the method, wherein the device further comprises at least one of: a charging port, or a data port, the method further comprising at least one of: charging the power source via the charging port; or communicating with one or more remote servers via the data port.
However, Chamberlain teaches the method, wherein the device further comprises at least one of: a charging port, or a data port (“one or both of the base unit or the pet toy itself is/are controllable remotely, for example by local PC by wireless or wired LAN, USB” Page 17 Paragraph 4), the method further comprising at least one of: charging the power source via the charging port; or communicating with one or more remote servers via the data port (Page 17 Paragraph 4).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the device of Sanchez, with the wired data connection of Chamberlain, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to allow for more reliable communication between devices.
Claims 46-47 and 49-50 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sanchez in view of Wang as applied to claims 33 and 41 above, and further in view of Mott et al. (US 2022/0151207) and Kim et al. (KR 20210072643).
Regarding Claim 46, Sanchez as modified teaches the device of 33. Sanchez further discloses wherein the processor is further configured to: process data (“After the interactive input is received, the interactive input is sent from the input detection device to the control unit for processing (Step E).”).
Sanchez fails to disclose the processor is further configured to process the data with one or more algorithms stored in the memory to determine at least one of: a bite force of one or more interactions, or a bite evenness of one or more interactions.
However, Mott teaches that it is well known to use one or more algorithms stored in the memory to process generated data (algorithm described in Paragraphs [0087-0089] for step 503 wellness assessment based on generated data aka health indicators).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the processor of Sanchez, with the algorithms stored to process health condition data as taught by Mott, with reasonable expectation of success in order to create a more efficient processor, and help provide the user with important information about the pet’s health.
Additionally, Kim teaches a similar pet interactive device wherein the processor is further configured to determine at least one of: a bite force of one or more interactions, or a bite evenness of one or more interactions (“a display panel 210 for displaying the number of bite force determined by the control unit 400” Claim 7).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the processor of Sanchez, to determine the bite force as taught by Kim, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to help the user check the oral health of the animal (Kim Page 3 Paragraph 5).
Regarding Claim 47, Sanchez as modified teaches the device of 33.
Sanchez fails to disclose the device, wherein the processor is further configured to: generate the data from the at least one sensor such that the one or more remote servers process the data with one or more algorithms stored in a server memory to determine at least one of: a bite force of one or more interactions, or a bite evenness of one or more interactions.
However, Mott teaches the device, wherein the processor is further configured to: generate the data from the at least one sensor such (health indicators step 502 and 503 Figure 5; Paragraphs [0080-0081]) that the one or more servers process the data with one or more algorithms stored in a server memory to determine a health condition (algorithm described in Paragraphs [0080] and [0088] for steps 502, 505, and 506).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the processor of Sanchez, with the algorithms stored to process health condition data as taught by Mott, with reasonable expectation of success in order to create a more efficient processor, and help provide the user with important information about the pet’s health.
Additionally, Kim teaches a similar pet interactive device the processor is further configured to receive the one or more parameters (“It may include a pressure measuring unit for measuring the degree to which the housing 110 is pressed” Page 3 Paragraph 6 of translation); generate the data from the at least one sensor determine at least one of: a bite force of one or more interactions, or a bite evenness of one or more interactions (“a display panel 210 for displaying the number of bite force determined by the control unit 400” Claim 7).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the sensor and processor of Sanchez, to generate data regarding the bite force as taught by Kim, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to help the user check the oral health of the animal (Kim Page 3 Paragraph 5).
Regarding Claim 49, Sanchez as modified teaches the method of 41. Sanchez further discloses wherein the processor is further processes data (“After the interactive input is received, the interactive input is sent from the input detection device to the control unit for processing (Step E).”)
Sanchez fails to disclose processing the data with one or more algorithms stored in the memory; and determining, via the processing, at least one of: a bite force of one or more interactions, or a bite evenness of one or more interactions.
However, Mott teaches that it is well known in the art to process data with one or more algorithms stored in the memory to determine a health condition (algorithm described in Paragraphs [0087-0089] for step 503 wellness assessment based on generated data aka health indicators).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the processor of Sanchez, with the algorithms stored to process health condition data as taught by Mott, with reasonable expectation of success in order to create a more efficient processor, and help provide the user with important information about the pet’s health.
Additionally, Kim teaches a similar pet interactive method comprising determining, via processing, at least one of: a bite force of one or more interactions, or a bite evenness of one or more interactions (“a display panel 210 for displaying the number of bite force determined by the control unit 400” Claim 7).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the sensor and processor of Sanchez, to determine the bite force as taught by Kim, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to help the user check the oral health of the animal (Kim Page 3 Paragraph 5).
Regarding Claim 50, Sanchez as modified teaches the method of 41.
Sanchez fails to disclose the method, further comprising: generating, via the processor, the data from the at least one sensor to enable processing of the data by the one or more remote servers with one or more algorithms stored in a server memory for determining at least one of: a bite force of one or more interactions, or a bite evenness of one or more interactions.
However, Mott teaches the method, further comprising: generating, via the processor, the data from the at least one sensor (health indicators step 502 and 503 Figure 5; Paragraphs [0080-0081]) to enable processing of the data by the one or more servers with one or more algorithms stored in a server memory (algorithm described in Paragraphs [0087-0089] for step 503 wellness assessment based on generated data aka health indicators).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the processor of Sanchez, with the algorithms stored to process health condition data as taught by Mott, with reasonable expectation of success in order to create a more efficient processor, and help provide the user with important information about the pet’s health.
Additionally, Kim teaches a similar pet interactive method comprising receiving, by the processor, the one or more parameters (“It may include a pressure measuring unit for measuring the degree to which the housing 110 is pressed” Page 3 Paragraph 6 of translation); generating, via the processor, the data from the at least one sensor to enable processing of the data for determining at least one of: a bite force of one or more interactions, or a bite evenness of one or more interactions (“a display panel 210 for displaying the number of bite force determined by the control unit 400” Claim 7).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the sensor and processor of Sanchez, to determine the bite force as taught by Kim, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to help the user check the oral health of the animal (Kim Page 3 Paragraph 5).
Claim 52 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sanchez in view of Wang as applied to claim 26 above, and further in view of O’Mara et al. (US 2015/0245593)
Regarding Claim 52, Sanchez as modified teaches the device of 36.
Sanchez fails to disclose the device, wherein the predetermined condition comprises reaching or exceeding a biteforce threshold and/or an engagement time threshold.
However, O’Mara teaches a pet toy (Abstract; Figures 2A-C) comprising at least one sensor, the at least one sensor configured to detect one or more parameters corresponding to at least one pet interaction with the device (“In one case, a determination to "play dead" for a period of time is made based on whether the device has been trapped (e.g., by a child, animal, or other obstacle).” Paragraph [0045]); control the toy based on a command from the one or more remote servers based on an occurrence of a predetermined condition (“When the article enters a "play dead" state, the article may output a "play dead" sound or motion pattern to indicate it is entering "play dead state",” Paragraph [0045]; “the computing system may be wholly or partially separate from the device. For example, a personal computer, mobile device, and/or cloud server may perform some or all of the steps of method 600.” Paragraph [0075]), wherein the predetermined condition comprises reaching or exceeding a biteforce threshold and/or an engagement time threshold (“If the flag time period is less than the flag time threshold (e.g., 3 seconds), the device enters a "play dead" state at 420.” Paragraph [0064]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the processor of Sanchez, to have a predetermined condition threshold for sending a command as taught by O’Mara, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to help ensure the pet can maintain a safe interaction and environment with the pet toy.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5/4/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues on pages 9-10 that the current drawings are sufficient to understand the invention. The Office respectfully disagrees. As stated in the remarks, Figure 7 shows a block diagram of the second housing, and Applicant also describes the second housing in Paragraphs [0070] and [0075]. However the passages pulled from theses paragraphs are simply stating what the second housing could do and not what the second housing actually is. As it stands, it is unclear what the second housing is, as there is no structural description, and a block diagram is insufficient for showing the structural nature of the second housing.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 26 and 38 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Newly added references Wang (KR 2020/0026443) (cited by applicant in IDS dated 7/07/26), Couse (US 2014/0267299) (cited by applicant in IDS dated 7/25/23), and O’Mara et al. (US 2015/0245593) in combination with previously used references, teach the amended independent claims as discussed in the currently presented rejection above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALANNA PETERSON whose telephone number is (571)272-6126. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 EST.
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, Joshua Huson can be reached at 571-270-5301. 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.
/A.K.P./Examiner, Art Unit 3642
/JOSHUA D HUSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3642
Prosecution Insights