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 .
DETAILED ACTION
A request for continued examination (RCE) 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has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action mailed on 09/17/2025 ("09-17-25 Final OA") has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 11/17/2025 ("11-17-25 Submission") has been entered when the RCE was filed on 02/16/2026.
In the 11-17-25 Submission, the Applicant substantively independent claim 14.
Currently, amended elected claims 14-17 are examined below while non-elected claims 1-13 and 18-20 remain withdrawn.
Information Disclosure Statement
Two information disclosure statements submitted on 02/18/2026 ("02-18-26 IDS") and 04/06/2026 (“04-06-26 IDS”) are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the 02-18-26 IDS and 04-06-26 IDS are being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's amendments to the independent claim 14 have overcome the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection of claims 14-17 set forth starting on page 3 under line item number 1 of the 09-17-25 Final OA.
Applicant’s amendments to the independent claim 14 have overcome the prior-art rejections based on Shi set forth starting on page 4 under line item number 2 of the 09-17-25 Final OA.
Applicant’s amendments to the independent claim 14 have overcome the prior-art rejections based on Moss set forth starting on page 8 under line item number 3 of the 09-17-25 Final OA.
Substantive amendments to the independent claim 14 required further consideration and search, however. New grounds of rejections are provided below.
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, an amended feature of “wherein the receptacle is configured to accept an insertion of a component of an attachment device via an aperture in the receptacle” recited in the independent claim 14 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). Fig. 4D shows the receptacle 412. The aperture is not located in the receptacle 412 but within the female securing component 413. 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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Independent claim 14 fails to comply with the written description requirement, because an amended feature of “wherein the receptacle is configured to accept an insertion of a component of an attachment device via an aperture in the receptacle” recited in the independent claim 14 is not supported by the original disclosure. Fig. 4D shows the receptacle 412. The aperture is not located in the receptacle 412 but within the female securing component 413.
Claims 15-17 are rejected for depending on the rejected independent claim 14.
A. Prior-art rejections based at least in part by Robadey
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Robadey (previously-cited Pub. No. US 2019/0385037 A1 to Robadey et al.).
Figs. 1, 5, 6 and 7 of Robadey are provided to support the rejections below:
[AltContent: textbox (AP)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
568
429
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (AP)]
PNG
media_image2.png
387
591
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding independent claim 14, Robadey teaches a universal radio frequency identification enabled male securing device, comprising:
a receptacle 12 (para [0024] - “As ear tags and the manner of attachment of the same are generally known, the details with respect to attachment portion 13, for example, configured as a female attachment portion to receive a corresponding male member, and the attachment of tag housing 12 will not be described herein in further detail.”), wherein the receptacle 12 is configured to accept an insertion of a component (male member) of an attachment device via an aperture AP in the receptacle 12 (A limitation of “configured to accept an insertion of a component of an attachment device” does not require that the presence of the component of an attachment device. The limitation does require a capability of the receptacle 12 to be able to accept an insertion a component via an aperture AP, which it does as shown in Fig. 1, 5, 6 and 7);
a radio frequency identification device 26 (para [0032] - “Thereby, loop antenna 24, integrated circuit 22, and main antenna 18 form an RFID circuit (transponder) 26.”), wherein the radio frequency identification device 26 is configured to transmit information electronically (para [0032] - “Consequently, main antenna 18 will induce an AC voltage in loop antenna 24, which may power integrated circuit 22 for performing communications with the reader device in a known manner using the RFID protocol.”), and wherein the radio frequency identification device 26 is affixed to an outer portion of the receptacle 12.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Robadey and further in view of Pub. No. US 2017/0280688 A1 to Deliou et al. (“Deliou”).
Regarding claim 15, Robadey teaches a female securing device 13, but does not show a mating component, wherein the mating component is configured to engage a female securing device.
Deliou teaches an ear tag 60L(i) (see Figs. 7A-2, 7A-3, 7A-4 and 7A-5) having a mating component 720 (para [0142] - “an ordinary button/fastener (see FIG. 7A-4 for fastener 720) is used to fasten this ear tag 60L(i) to an animal 60, such as a production animal 80 like cattle.”) that mates with a female securing component 730.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Robadey to have or use the mating component as taught by Deliou to secure the device to an ear of a cattle as Robadey and Deliou independently acknowledge that fastening means of securing an ear tag is well known in the art. Since “all the claimed elements were know 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 nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 538, 416, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395 (2007); Sakraida v. AG Pro, Inc., 425 U.S. 273, 282, 189 USPQ 449, 453 (1976); Anderson’s-Black Rock, Inc. v. Pavement Salvage Co., 396 U.S. 57, 62-63, 163 USPQ 673, 675 (1969); Great Atlantic & P. Tea Co. v. Supermarket Equip. Corp., 340 U.S. 147, 152, 87 USPQ 303, 306 (1950).” (quoting Section 2143.02 of the MPEP).
Regarding claim 15, as a result of the modification, the combination of Robadey and Deliou teaches a mating component 720 (Deliou), wherein the mating component 720 (Deliou) is configured to engage a female securing device 13 (Robadey).
Regarding claim 16, as a result of the modification, the combination of Robadey and Deliou teaches the receptable 12 (Robadey) that comprises the mating component 720 (Deliou).
Regarding claim 17, as a result of the modification, the combination of Robadey and Deliou teaches the mating component 720 (Deliou) that comprises annular-styled connecting component.
B. Prior-art rejections based on Chitty
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Pub. No. US 2024/0164345 A1 to Chitty et al. (“Chitty”).
Figs. 2, 5, 16 and 17 of Chitty are provided to support the rejections below:
PNG
media_image3.png
312
310
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
273
211
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
312
250
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
320
214
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding independent claim 14, Chitty teaches a universal radio frequency identification enabled male securing device (para [0072] - “In another form, the identification tag 102 includes a machine-readable identification tag 12 for example in the form of a barcode (such as a two-dimensional barcode) and/or a radio frequency identification (RFID) tag.”; para [0073] - “Referring to FIGS. 6 to 18, the tag 1 is shown in more detail.”; para [0083] - “Referring in particular to FIGS. 15 to 17, the removeable part 5 includes a stud cap 41 (or “connector”) for receiving and securing the stud 7 and a main tag portion 42 (or “sensor tag”), which houses a sensor system 43 including a battery 44.”; see also Figs. 2 and 5), comprising:
a receptacle 5 (para [0083] - “removeable part 5”), wherein the receptacle 5 is configured to accept an insertion of a component 28, 29, 36 (para [0081] - “The stud 7 also comprises first and second opposite wedge-like barbs 36, 37 (or “hooks” or “protrusions”) on the outside of the first and second side walls 28, 29 thereby providing locking wings.”) of an attachment device 7 (para [0082] - “The stud 7”) via an aperture in the receptacle 5;
a radio frequency identification device 42 (para [0012]- “The tag may further comprise a machine-readable identification tag permanently attached to or forming part of the first for machine-readably identifying the animal. The machine-readable identification tag may be an RFID tag.”), wherein the radio frequency identification device 42 is configured to transmit information electronically, and wherein the radio frequency identification device 42 is affixed to an outer portion of the receptacle 5.
Regarding claim 15, Chitty teaches a mating component 28, 29, 36, wherein the mating component 28, 29, 36 is configured to engage a female securing device 41 (para [0083] - “…the removable part 5 includes a stud cap 41 (or “connector”) for receiving and securing the stud 7 and a main tag portion 42 (or “sensor tag”) which houses a sensor system 43 including a battery 44.”).
Regarding claim 16, Chitty teaches the receptacle that comprises the mating component 28, 29, 36.
Regarding claim 17, Chitty teaches the mating component 28, 29, 36 that comprises an annular-styled connecting component (tubular connector) or a torsional-style connecting component (e.g., locking-wings).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Pub. No. US 2023/0394993 A1 to Burton
Pub. No. US 2020/0039128 A1 to Knapp
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL JUNG whose telephone number is (408) 918-7554. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30 A.M. to 7 P.M.
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, Eliseo Ramos-Feliciano can be reached on (571) 272-7925. 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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MICHAEL JUNG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2817 01 May 2026
Prosecution Insights